If Iran kills two million Jews in an afternoon they will find a way to blame George W. Bush

January 18, 2013
On orders from Moscow, American Jewish Communists suspended criticism of Hitler during the August 1939-June 1941 period of the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact. Violation of that edict was called “premature antifascism” and men died for it. The left-wing group-think party line far outranks Zionism for many, many Jews. You are going to see this in the immediate future, as Mr. Obama lines up his many Jewish friends and supporters to back Mr. Hagel.

Nick Cohen, Colin Shindler and left antisemitism

June 10, 2012

Trotsky: heartfelt echoThe idea that only fascism is the cause of hate and that Communism stands apart from it is naive and ignorant. There are other reasons to hate someone other then their race. I could hate you because of the brand of shoes you wear and given power, your shoes could be the means of which I will attempt to divide you from a populist mob rampage or in the back rooms of a dictatorship. The great irony that we have accepted RACE as being the only prejudice humans can have… and yet it’s an artificial construct that can be taylor made for the elite. Of course you can change your shoes… or you can change your philosophy or religion… but what if you really liked those shoes?

…In the early 20th century, Eastern European Jews had two love affairs – with Communism and with Zionism. But the Communists betrayed them. The Hungarian intellectual, Arthur Koestler, compared his time as a Communist with the deception practised on Jacob when he slept with the ugly Leah instead of Rachel.
Early Communists didn’t want to be bothered with Jewish issues which, they thought, would be automatically resolved under socialism. By the 1920s, Stalin was using antisemitism to defeat his opponents in the party, many of whom were Jewish. One, Karl Radek, asked: “What’s the difference between Moses and Stalin? Moses took the Jews out of Egypt. Stalin takes them out of the Communist Party”.
By the 1930s, Stalin’s great opponent, Trotsky, had come to believe that Jews might well not assimilate after all. He began to speak of “the Jewish nation”. A socialist Zionist who met him in 1937 thought her words “penetrated deep into his heart, that he was glad to hear about a world from which he had dissociated himself”. She thought that “he was listening not like a man who placed himself above all nationality,” and that, “our great idea found an echo in his heart”. Trotsky’s biographer and disciple, Isaac Deutscher, a self-confessed “non-Jewish Jew”, later admitted that, had he urged Jews in the 1930s to go to Palestine, many, including his own family, would have been saved.
The non-Communist left was more sympathetic to Zionism. Ralph Miliband, father of Ed and David, insisted, in a long correspondence with a Belgian socialist, Marcel Liebman, that his kind of socialism did not preclude recognition of Jewish identity. “What right do the Jews have to be in Palestine… Their right stems from the fact that the world is what it is”. Perhaps there is no better answer.
(MORE)

(Simply Jews)stumbled across this, sort of, on the Standpoint website. It’s Nick Cohen’s review of Colin Shindler’s “Israel and the European Left”. Actually, (Simply Jews) was chasing down a link in a comments thread elsewhere, but what matters is that (Simply Jews) found it!(Nick Cohen, Colin Shindler and left antisemitism)
Cohen starts off with a set of general comments on the original ideological links between Communism and Zionism, before they became, in his own words, separated at birth. Then he comes to Shindler’s book. Almost his first direct comment on it is the following: “If [Colin Shindler] has not produced a secret history, then it is a history of a secret in plain view; an account of facts that are available but not discussed. After (Brian Goldfarb) interviewed him at Jewish Book Week, members of the audience said they had never before heard anyone examine the racist strain in left-wing thinking, even though it was there from the beginning.”
Of course, the readers of this and similar sites will not be at all surprised that this strain, as Cohen puts it, in left-wing thinking. If we weren’t aware, we wouldn’t be here in the first place. Anne’s opinions (another Israel based website, in English) was kind enough to post a longish article By (Brian Goldfarb) on the Jewish Book Week, including his reactions to the Shindler/Cohen session.

(How the Left Turned Against the Jews | Standpoint)”You cry out against Jewish capital, gentlemen?” cried one. “You are against Jewish capital and want to eliminate the stock manipulators. Rightly so. Trample the Jewish capitalists under foot, hang them from the street lamps, stamp them out.”
Ruth Fischer sounded like a Nazi. She used the same hate-filled language. She wanted to murder Jews. But Hitler would never have accepted her. Fischer was a leader of the German Communist Party. She made her small differences of opinion with the Nazis clear when she went on to say that her audience should not just trample Jewish capitalists to death, but all capitalists.
Unconcerned by the contradiction, Hitler said the Jews were at once a “Judaeo-Bolshevik” conspiracy and a capitalist conspiracy. In Fischer’s case, he was half right. The rabble-rouser who wanted to hang Jewish capitalists was a Jewish Communist, the sister of Hanns Eisler, who wrote music for some of Brecht’s early plays. Eisler and Brecht fled the Nazis in 1933. A sense of self-preservation triumphed over ideology, and they found permanent sanctuary in America rather than in Stalin’s Soviet Union. Hanns could not have been surprised when the House Committee on Un-American Activities demanded his deportation. He was a prominent Communist composer who worked for Hollywood, which the American Right considered a nest of reds. Eisler was perhaps more surprised to discover that his own sister Ruth was a witness for the prosecution when the McCarthyites arraigned him in 1947. Supporters of Stalin had denounced her as a “Left oppositionist” Trotskyist. She responded by not only going over to the “capitalist camp” but by providing evidence against Hanns, and against a second brother, Gerhart, who was a leading agent in the Comintern.(MORE)

(How the Left Turned Against the Jews | Standpoint)Shindler is a properly impartial historian, but when his beliefs show through he reveals himself to be a social democrat rather than an Israel-firster or man of the Right. The left-wing press won’t like it for the same reason Caliban did not like the sight of his face in the mirror.(MORE)Beyond the ideological divide lies the almost taboo nature of Shindler’s subject. Conventional wisdom does not regard Communism with the same abhorrence as fascism, even though if you want to be an accountant about it and add up the skulls of the dead, you will find that the Communists murdered many more people than the fascists did, began murdering before fascists came to power and carried on murdering after the fascists had gone. Yet few can bring themselves to see fascism and Communism as moral equivalents. Even Robert Conquest, who mapped the crimes of Stalin, and had been mocked by the know-nothing Left of his day as a Cold War fantasist, said he thought the Nazis were worse than the Communists. He couldn’t explain why, they just felt worse.

(How the Left Turned Against the Jews | Standpoint)The movements for Jewish self-determination and Russian Communism were twins separated at birth. The First Zionist conference met on August 27, 1897, to discuss the escape from anti-Semitic Europe to Palestine. The General Jewish Labour Bund held its first conference in Vilnius on October 7, 1897, to organise the Russian Empire’s Jews in a united socialist party. The Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, from which the Bolsheviks split, held its first conference in March 1898. Naturally, the Bund sent delegates. For liberal and left-wing Europeans of the late 19th century, no regime was more repellent than Tsarist autocracy, and nothing better symbolised its reactionary nature than its anti-Semitic pogroms. Jews responded to the terror by keeping their Jewish identity and joining Jewish socialist movements, such as the Bund, or by becoming entirely assimilated Communists, as Trotsky and many others did.(MORE)

(How the Left Turned Against the Jews | Standpoint)The coincidences of history do not end there. On November 2, 1917, Arthur Balfour sent his declaration to Baron Rothschild that the British Empire would allow the Jewish people to find a home in Palestine “it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities”. On November 7, 1917, the Bolsheviks stormed the Winter Palace.(MORE)

(How the Left Turned Against the Jews | Standpoint)As so often the theory was one thing and the practice another. The belief that Communism was better than Nazism stops us seeing that the Bolshevik Revolution was an insane idea from its inception. A “vanguard” party, composed of a tiny band of professional revolutionaries, could hold on to power only by terrorising the subject population. The Bolsheviks had to crush independent Jewish organisations, as they had to crush all other independent organisations. Yet even before the Bolsheviks produced a left-wing variant of the Nazi conspiracy theory, the Jews were a special case in the old Soviet Union. The Bolsheviks recognised other minorities as minorities with homelands. They never said that there should be a Jewish homeland in their empire. Socialist Zionism was a particular threat to the new regime. If Jews succeeded in building a socialist state in Israel, it would be a rival. Lenin set a loyalty test. Before he came to power, he purged the Communist movement of supporters of the Bund. The only Jews he permitted to remain were Jews who were so thoroughly assimilated that they were barely Jews at all.(MORE)

(Trotsky: heartfelt echo By Colin Shindler, Continuum, £17.99 Review: Israel and the European Left | The Jewish Chronicle By Vernon Bogdanor) Unlike Lenin, Stalin was an anti-Semite and understood the uses of irrational hatred. His crimes took the forms of the sins of omission and commission. The omission was not to see Nazism for what it was, and ally with it in the Hitler-Stalin pact of August 1939. It remains one of the most hypocritical and stupid acts in the annals of diplomacy, where examples of hypocrisy and stupidity are not hard to find. Throughout the 1930s Communist writers, poets and propagandists had denounced fascism and urged a popular front against the Hitlerian menace. Then in August 1939 Stalin stood on his head and announced a Soviet reconciliation with Nazi Germany so they might partition Poland between them. Stalin believed in Hitler. Solzhenitsyn speculated in The First Circle that Hitler was the only man he ever really trusted. The complete surprise Hitler achieved when he invaded an unprepared Soviet Union in 1941 suggests that Solzhenitsyn was right. By signing the pact, the Soviet Union agreed to hand over the Jews of western Poland to the Nazis. Although conventional historians lazily say that the pact shocked a generation of leftists, Shindler points out that membership of the British Communist Party actually rose after the tyrants had cut a deal, and hardly anyone worried about the fate of Polish Jewry. Those who had shouted loudest about the dangers of fascism from 1933 to 1938 were as willing as Chamberlain and Halifax to appease it in 1939.(MORE)

It’s gotta be the shoes


Hitler Nearly Drowned As Child… Catholic Priest Saved Him (and you thought Pious XII was bad)

January 6, 2012

(Libra Bunda)THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: Adolf Hitler nearly drowned when he was four years-old but was saved by a local priest, historians have claimed.
Newspaper clippings have emerged detailing how a child – who experts believe was Adolf Hitler – was rescued from the River Passau, Germany, in January 1894.
The infant is not named in the article, which was uncovered in a German archive, but it matches a story recounted by priest Max Tremmel in 1980. He said his predecessor Johann Kuehberger told him he had rescued Hitler when the Nazi leader was a child. Residents of Passau, where Hitler grew up, also claimed the priest’s story was true.
The account of the incident remained uncorroborated until recently when the article emerged. » | Amy Willis | Friday, January 06, 2012
WOCHENBLATT: Was wäre, wenn Hitler 1894 in Passau ertrunken wäre? : Als vierjähriger Junge wohnte Hitler in der Kapuzinerstraße in der Innstadt. Im gleichen Haus wohnte der spätere Passauer Domkapellmeister Johann Kühberger, der viele Jahre später seinem Nachfolger Max Tremmel berichtet haben soll, dass er als Junge den kleinen Adolf vor dem Ertrinken im Inn gerettet habe. » | Mittwoch 04. Januar 2012

oh noes Captain Kirk, Edith Keeler didn’t need to die!


Hitlers Jewish Soldiers

September 21, 2011
(Brian Cuban): Adolf Hitler was aware of this and for a while allowed Jews to serve.  In most cases these soldiers had no knowledge of the Holocaust killing machine.  From their point of view they were simple German patriots fighting for their country. Many did not even consider themselves Jewish. Some were unaware of their “Jewish blood”.  According to his book, at least 20 soldiers of “Jewish blood” were awarded The Knights Cross.  Included in the ranks were two field marshals and fifteen generals. The most prominently known of these commanders of Jewish descent was General Erhard Milch who had one Jewish parent.  He was deputy to Herman Goring, the head of the Luftwaffe(German Air Force). While most of Jewish descent were ordinary Wehrmacht soldiers, some rose to very high ranking positions of authority in the Nazi Regime. Some either directly or indirectly participated in the Jewish killing machine. …Finland was not under Nazi rule. Finland, from its perspective, was fighting for its independence from Russia rather than to support any anti-Semitic ideology or German persecution. Finland as a nation refused to endorse the Nazi anti-Semitic policies and refused to deport, persecute or discriminate against its Jewish population. It is quite the paradox that despite this policy their fighting alongside Germany certainly helped Germany achieve military goals and indirectly aided in the Jewish persecutions. The Finnish-Jewish soldiers were not blind to what was going on. It caused quite a bit of internal conflict and tension with the German soldiers. This was also not a racial classification issue. Finland did not discriminate against or classify their Jews. In this situation, full, practicing Jews were fighting alongside the Nazis against the Allies, fighting predominately at Leningrad. (MORE)

Israel’s Supporters Must Learn from the Enemy

September 20, 2011

(Bill Levinson) We removed our post that compared Henry Ford’s proven job creation methods with Barack Obama’s proven job destruction methods because a couple of readers expressed outrage against Ford personally because of his involvement in anti-Semitic activities. We do not agree with these readers (as shown below) but we don’t want to put Ted in the position of circulating a piece to which people might take exception. This shows, however, that Euro-Americans in general and Jews in particular have failed to understand a simple point: a person we might find offensive or unsavory, or even an outright enemy, is often the best teacher. Our collective failure to learn this lesson puts Israel in particular and Civilization as a whole at considerable and even mortal risk. We will begin with a couple of extremely simple examples of this principle. The United Kingdom is famous for the 95th Rifles, a regiment immortalized by Bernard Cornwell’s Sharpe series.The UK is also famous for its rocket artillery, as immortalized by “the rockets’ red glare” in our National Anthem. Neither rifle-armed skirmishers nor artillery rockets were however British inventions; both were examples of learning from the enemy.The War of Independence taught the British that a man in a bright red coat with a musket that could not hit reliably beyond 70 to 100 paces was an easy mark for a rifleman in dull-colored clothing who could melt into a forest after firing. They accordingly created an Experimental Corps of Riflemen (later the 95th Rifles) who wore dark green uniforms to blend in with foliage, much as their American opponents had blended in with their surroundings. The Congreve Rocket was meanwhile the result of the British being on the receiving end of Tipu Sultan’s rocket artillery during the Anglo-Mysore Wars.
We obviously do not agree with what Henry Ford published about Jews, or for that matter his support for Prohibition or his “sociology department” that intruded on his employees’ private lives. We did an Internet search on suspicion and found Henry Ford on a list of historical figures (along with Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Edison, and George Washington) who were suspected of having Asperger’s Syndrome.
People with Asperger’s Syndrome are often described, as having social skills deficits, reluctance to listen, difficulty understanding social give and take, and other core characteristics, is typically quite misunderstood and/or misdiagnosed in our country today.
Other characteristics include a lack of empathy and a fascination with systems, i.e. “how things work.” The latter certainly describes Ford, noting his boyhood fascination with taking watches apart and even being able to put them back together. His production line was described as a giant clock, and it relied on workers as “components” who performed repetitive tasks to make the clock work. The system’s success paid the “components” high wages but it is quite likely that Ford viewed people as something like elements of a machine–hence his infamous Sociology Department–with roughly identical desires and motivations. If Ford did have Asperger’s, he could have understood intellectually that he needed to pay fair wages to gain his workers’ commitment but it is doubtful that he could really empathize with them on an emotional level. If true, this theory explains quite a bit. Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (in which Ford is God, My Life and Work is the Bible, and people are manufactured to fit society’s needs) constitutes Fordism taken to the extreme.
In any event, The International Jew was not Henry Ford’s creation. It a translation of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion that was given to Ford by the Tsarist Russian propagandist Boris Brasol. To put this in contemporary terms, Ford saw the equivalent of a sensationalistic Web site or E-mail, copied it to everybody on his mailing list, and pressed the “Send” key. His “Send” key unfortunately consisted of the Dearborn Independent, so what he circulated caused substantial harm to Jews and, in the end, Ford’s own reputation.
What then are the lessons to be learned from this experience? How many of us have, at one time or another, forwarded an E-mail or Web posting without investigating thoroughly? We have received them from highly intelligent and well educated friends only to find, after investigating, that the material was untrue. The National Jewish Democratic Council relied on somebody else’s blog posting or equivalent to publish a vicious falsehood about the Christian computer game “Left Behind: Eternal Forces.” None of this excuses Ford for his own failure to investigate Brasol’s material thoroughly but we must make sure we do not repeat the same mistakes.
Let’s assume for the sake of argument the absolute worst about Henry Ford. This does not change the fact that his methods created the American middle class along with the 40 hour work week, and made the United States the wealthiest and most powerful nation on earth. Our thoughts must now move to application of this knowledge to our country’s current problem: an incompetent buffoon in the White House who has proven repeatedly that he knows nothing about how to create jobs or prosperity. (The same individual wishes to reward Palestinian terrorism with territorial concessions at Israel’s expense.) We should welcome assistance from any source that will help remove Obama from office next year and, even more importantly, create high wage jobs for the millions of American workers who need them!
Now let’s move on to a genuine Nazi who has plenty to teach us. Most people cannot get past their revulsion at Hitler’s statement, “If you win, you need not have to explain. If you lose, you should not be around to explain,” to internalize the truth of this observation. Hitler lost so he had to follow his own advice on April 30, 1945. His equally murderous and genocidal counterpart Josef Stalin was on the winning side so he never had to explain. Neither did Mao Tse Tung or Pol Pot, for that matter. This applies directly to Israel versus its militant Islamic neighbors: “If you win, even if you have to kill several million Arab aggressors and inflict some collateral damage while you do it, you won’t have to explain. If you lose by playing nice and worrying about world opinion, you won’t be around to explain.”
We observe further than ancient Jewish history was not very “nice,” with the result that today’s Jews need not explain while the Canaanites and so on are not around to explain. Roman history was not very “nice” either but the sole consequence of Rome’s genocide of the Carthaginian people is that Southern Europe and even England speaks words with Latin instead of Phoenician roots. Modern Hungary and Mongolia have statues, currency, and/or postage with images of Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan, neither of whom were nice people but who did outstanding jobs for the Huns and the Mongols respectively. Ann Barnhardt elaborates further on the problems with being “nice.” (Christian-oriented material can be ignored without loss of continuity.)
This is not to say that Israel or any decent country should initiate aggression today even though history shows it can often get away with it. It does say that, if an aggressor attacks you, you must take him down in such a manner that he will never lift a hand to you again. Only in movies must the hero (or often a terrified female victim who turns the tables momentarily) let the downed serial killer or monster get up again, and that’s only because the movie can’t end at the 45 minute mark. If you put your attacker down for good, you don’t have to explain. If you let him get up again (in the absence of law enforcement personnel who can take him into custody), it is quite likely that you won’t be around to explain. Israel should have put its attackers down for good in 1967.
Most people and especially Jews are meanwhile reluctant to read Mein Kampf because of its content and authorship. This is EXACTLY why the Arabs, who love the book not merely for its anti-Semitic aspects but for its very practical content, are currently demonizing Jews in general and Israel in particular the way the Nazis demonized Jews during the 1930s.
Mein Kampf however goes beyond a discussion of how to use propaganda effectively; it shows explicitly that Hitler followed the advice to learn from the enemy, in this case the Triple Entente. The Entente and its American sympathizers demonized Germans the same way the Nazis later demonized Jews. The following could in fact be described as a blood libel of Germans, noting that it was proven that the Lusitania carried munitions and was therefore a legitimate military target.
Little Lost Children of the Lusitania (to view jpgs click here)
Main Kampf states explicitly that Germany failed to recognize the effectiveness of this kind of propaganda, and failed to reciprocate in kind: with visual images designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator, the man in the street and the man in the beer hall. If the Jews in Israel could bring themselves to read Mein Kampf, they would realize that Israel is repeating Imperial Germany’s mistakes to the letter while the enemies who want to destroy it are working straight from the Entente’s (and later the Nazis’) playbook.
Arab propaganda; could have been drawn by genuine Nazis
Our recommendation is and has always been retaliation in kind and with an enormity of compound interest, to dehumanize Israel’s enemies and militant “Islam” in general every bit as thoroughly as the Entente dehumanized the Central Powers. We should not hesitate to adapt propaganda images from the Second World War that were used to demonize Nazis and Japanese, along with similar material from the First World War and Spanish American War. As but one example:
The Palestinian Brute
Ethics and honor require only that the propaganda be truthful (and the militant Muslims have provided our side with an unlimited supply of truth), and that hatred and contempt be directed selectively against a specific behavioral choice (militant Islam) and never against an entire religious identity, race, or ethnicity.
George Santayana wrote that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Those who cannot or will not learn from the enemy, even an enemy as loathsome as Hitler, are likely to become history.

Agreed, but I disagree that Ford merely pressed the send button on facebook. Ford trolled the equivalent of internet forums for decades. He was more then just some guy who distributed Antisemitism. He was completely obsessed with it’s philosophy. Asperger syndrome is more then just Rain Man. It is more then just being systematic. Asperger syndrome is a tendency to be obsessed with a system and in this case the system was hate. We still can learn a lot from the most despicable people. On my friendfeed account I follow many twitter accounts that have complete contempt for my being. Should they know that I follow them in this manner they would probably call me a stalker. In fact one person I followed who was a former teacher even put me on the news as such. The point being is these people I follow not because they are complete idiots…many of them are geniuses… and many of them probably hate me. One example of a complete genius who I have been following for years goes by the name of SeanMcBride (on both twitter and friendfeed). He is a complete tech genius, and a debater that leaves me in awe. His contempt for Israel (though he does not hate Jews), leaves many writing him off as a common thug. He is no such thing. His genius for systems has led him to believe in the fear of Zionism and Neo Cons. My guess is he is similar personality to Henry Ford and I can’t tell you how informative his feed is. Both in Tech and Israel News (though in the latter it is our enemies spin). The point is that I am wise enough to follow those I don’t like. The world is full of grey area. The beauty of open feeds on the internet is that we can peer into the minds of those who are our opposition because those who do not like us have huge egos and want to share their information without realizing how easy it is to subvert that information. I suppose I am guilty of doing the same and I have no doubt that my opinions will be used against me (actually they were used against me in court and my first amendment rights were taken away by the state of Washington). Point being however is that we must not write people off just because they are Nazis or Anti-Zionists. We must enjoy the work of Wagner or the malarkey of the children’s book writer Roald Dahl. To reject those brilliant minds that reject us is futile. Sometimes there might even be brilliant Zionist writers who have flaws in other ways. I’d like to tell you who those people are, but it would hurt my own cause. A few people do come to mind however… I won’t mention the name. I can tell you that I still have a deep respect for their mind… and I leave them the hell alone because on a social level they are nuts. The worst is when two very flawed Israel supporting geniuses start attacking each other… and then even go so far as to get people out on the internet to take one side or the other. Life is complex. I have no doubt that there will come a day when I might depend on the guy above I mentioned SeanMcBride (who is my enemy) to defend me from people who are supposed to be on my side. I am known to be an opponent of feminism… (though I am a descendant of Emma Lazarus), but when I was in jail I depended on my feminist mother to get me out (The female and probably feminist identifying Jewish judge just would not listen to me). Never write out your opponent… and never assume because a person supports Israel that they are to be trusted. BTW, the teacher I described above… she wasn’t stupid either. Just crazy.


Why did Anders Breivik kill Norwegians and not Muslims?

July 26, 2011

Anders Behring Breivik is an updated Hitler hybrid. The goals are shared, but the methodology is changed. He isn’t interested in outside his Cultural Christian (but tolerant to atheism) borders. Anders’ attack was against Socialists. Socialists that were hostile to the West, but he didn’t see them as inherently hostile. Muslims were merely a side theatre. And yet he didn’t seem to have any real beef with Socialism. For Anders it was all about the dangers of “Internationalism”, but he seemed content with large government if he could control it. He had no problems with attacks against Muslims, as a way of encouraging Jihadi attacks, but even in this case, Muslims are just tools in his fight against the European traitors. His quotes are in RED

Q: Do I have to believe in God or Jesus in order to become a Justiciar Knight?
A: No, you don’t need to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus to fight for our Christian cultural heritage. It is enough that you are a Christian-agnostic or a Christian-atheist (an atheist who wants to preserve at least the basics of the European Christian cultural legacy

If the NSDAP had been isolationistic instead of imperialistic (expansionist) and just deported the Jews (to a liberated and Muslim free Zion) instead of massacring them, the anti-European hate ideology known as multiculturalism would have never been institutionalized in Western Europe.

this image is taken before the carnage

Breivik does mention that large numbers of Jews would have to be executed as Class A or Class B traitors, but urges targeting by political belief, rather than by race.
While most have swallowed the idea that Breivik was a counterjihadist, his actual plan was to exploit tensions over Muslim terrorism, in order to conduct a campaign of terrorism against European targets and seize power with a more stable version of National Socialism.
Breivik was not a Nazi himself, for tactical reasons, because he disagreed with Nazi expansionism. But his own plan called for the use of WMD’s in Europe and the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of traitors. The echoes of the Turner Diaries are very obviously present in his manifesto.
Breivik viewed Muslims as the enemy, but only domestically. He emphasized that;

“Knights Templar do not intend to persecute devout Muslims”

And he contemplated collaborating with them on terrorist attacks against Europe.

“An alliance with the Jihadists might prove beneficial to both parties… We both share one common goal.”

The_Caliphate was a useful enemy for his cause. In Breivik’s own words, this is how such an arrangement would play out:

“They are asked to provide a biological compound manufactured by Muslim scientists in the Middle East. Hamas and several Jihadi groups have labs and they have the potential to provide such substances. Their problem is finding suitable martyrs who can pass “screenings” in Western Europe. This is where we come in. We will smuggle it in to the EU and distribute it at a target of our choosing. We must give them assurances that we are not to harm any Muslims etc.”

Ask yourself if these are the words of a anti-Jihadist who was fighting against Islam. Or a delusional European terrorist who was willing to ally with Jihadist against his fellow Europeans.
Breivik spells out that he is willing to kill Europeans on behalf of just about anyone…

There might come a time when we, the PCCTS, Knights Templar will consider to use or even to work as a proxy for the enemies of our enemies.

Under these circumstances, the PCCTS, Knights Templar will for the future consider working with the enemies of the EU/US hegemony such as Iran (South Korea is unlikely), al-Qaeda, al-Shabaab or the rest of the devout fractions of the Islamic Ummah with the intention for deployment of small nuclear, radiological, biological or chemical weapons in Western European capitals and other high priority locations.
Justiciar Knights and other European Christian martyrs can avoid the scrutiny normally reserved for individuals of Arab descent and we can ensure successful deployment and detonation in the location of our choice.

This should put to rest any idea that Breivik was on a crusade against Islam. He was a deluded man who imagined himself leading a takeover of Europe, even if he had to serve as a Muslim proxy to do it. This post has quotes from Sultan Knish

over the week my family was in Cape Cod. I was left to tend the house in Poughkeepsie with my mother’s pal… a radical feminist. I try to understand her. In a conversation at the farm here at Vassar she clarified that she was against penetration of any form. That penetration according to her was the cause of all oppression against women. I asked her how she would apply this finding. She said she would only work with consent. The wording was left is such a way as to assume harmony. She doctored her fascism in such a way that was suitable for her to spread her ideas in a popular forum. Her real intent remains hidden… of course we all know that mob tyranny always works with consent…. ok… so why does this apply to Anders? Because I am making speculation that Anders might of not really spoken his real beliefs. That Anders was trying to make a philosophy that others could swallow… often when people create fabrications they start believing it themselves. Somewhere in Ander’s subconscious was a fear of others… to get rid of others he was willing to work with the others. None of it makes sense to you and me… but Anders convinced himself of his own fabrication. He had no problem with greater control and socialism… as long as it was his own control and socialism. He had no problem with Christians… because he created his own “Christian”. and he had no problem working with Muslims because he created an Islam he thought he could control. Islam is very simple. It says to kill or tax those who are not Muslim. Anders made his enemy and his own identity more complex then they actually are. Christianity and Islam can not be altered like Judaism can be.


Why Israel is Losing the Propaganda War? Read Mein Kampf

June 20, 2011
If the media is the message then what is distribution of the information? Today how information travels is as important as the content that one receives.  Semiotic-ally speaking distribution has moved from being signified and has become signifier.  Distribution channels alter the meaning of any idea and Israel is abstaining from distribution.
…Mein Kampf
Manga Selling Well
via japanprobe.com

The Palestinians also obviously regard propaganda as a weapon of the first order, they are using it efficiently and effectively, and the Government of Israel is standing with its hands down at its sides while they do it. Mein Kampf should not be banned or restricted in Israel. Mein Kampf, and particularly the parts about propaganda, should be required reading in Israel’s schools and as a prerequisite for holding any government position and for being an officer in the Armed Forces. – Bill Levinson via docstalk.blogspot.com


…an Arabic translation of Adolf Hitler’s “Mien Kampf” is selling extremely well in Arab lands, including the P.A. territory.     (See also Holocaust and bear in mind the World War II links between the Nazis and Yasser Arafat’s family.)
These editions were published in Lebanon in 1975 (left) and 1995 (right)