This article is the work of a reader named Coaltraine.

I have been recently reading Adorno and Horkheimer’s Dialectic of Enlightenment, published in 1947 as one of the Frankfurt School’s first public forays into what Jews had been involved in conspiratorially for decades and what later got labelled Critical Theory. Basically, the Jews of Germany were throughout this period internally trying to undermine Hitler’s National Socialist revolution through academia and culture before it could even get off the ground formally, and after the war, their goal switched to “Never Again!” almost overnight. We have been living now for 70+ years under that vow of theirs.

And so I basically just had some observations that I thought I’d share with the forum because I had the time and I wanted to get this down as a reference for posterity. Nothing here is like revolutionary or anything in my opinion, and at least on this forum mine would probably be a common judgment if anything of the book, its agenda, its thesis, its whole basic premise to begin with, and how all this has combined in the century after the book’s publication to define how these topics are commonly framed and presented (ironically uncritically) to the general public today whether in an academic setting or within just the more general realms of politics and culture. But I figured that even here on the forum, many of you guys might not be very familiar at all with the book’s specifics- although I’m sure everyone has observed the Frankfurt School’s influence in the West in one way or another. And while even normies now are referencing “Cultural Marxism”, I think basically that we ourselves in order to guide normie-cons particularly should generally have some sort of formal responses or rebuttals to these major ongoing Jewish intellectual conspiracies, which is what the Frankfurt School and its Critical Theory is basically, on hand always so that we can reference it if/when needed whether we’re red-pilling normies or we’re debating Ben Shapiro or Rachel Maddow and their partisans respectively. So what follows is my basic rebuttal and what I wrote down late last night immediately after finishing it. For those of you who need a quick refresher in the form of a video, this below does a decent job at presenting the background:

In Dialectic of Enlightenment, the authors basically see this pattern throughout Euro history singularly of reversion to what they consider evil, outdated, and backward movements and modes of being. They focus on Fascism in particular because when they wrote the book this is what freightened them and all Jews most globally, because then as now its ethos was an alternative to the miseries of modernity. So keep in mind that what Horkheimer and Adorno Semitically see below as “self-destruction” stereotypically is in reality rather “course-correction” in for example the rise of the Third Reich as well as other prominent historical instances of challenge to Semitic hegemony. For example, just from the book’s description on Amazon we find:
a paranoid behavioral structure, expressed in aggressive anti-Semitism, that marks the limits of enlightenment. The authors perceive a common element in these phenomena, the tendency toward self-destruction of the guiding criteria inherent in Enlightenment thought from the beginning.

To start to unpack all that, we see that the authors here just assume that “enlightenment” was ever even desirable or practically practicable in the first place, which it wasn’t. In the very beginning, the Enlightenment was forced top-downward upon the people, who were at best ignorant, gullible, and naive of the new bargain being struck (proverbially with Satan, or his earthly representatives the Jews) in the modern “social contract”, which favored individuality over corporate identity, which the Jews would use in the future not only to install themselves as this new democratic regime’s high-priests and celebrities but also to undermine our culture, religion, and ethnic identity. For if the people would’ve comprehended the totality and ubiquity of transformation then being proposed, they would’ve rejected it wholesale and emphatically most likely, which is why it was forced upon the people regardless of preference. The Enlightenment despite what Wikipedia says was not popular really, and the people back then in the main wanted nothing more than to maintain their religion and corporate identity. It was dominated really by a new merchant class of rootless cosmopolitan in alliance with the former regime’s minor nobility who desired to cheat its way to the top of the hierarchy under the pretext of Democracy.

So the authors here are developing this dialectic, which is real and historical in my opinion, between their ideal in Radical Enlightenment on one side verses the people’s natural reversion and reaction back to hierarchy, monarchy, theocracy, and collectivity that the French Revolution and its consequences eventually robbed people of to the point of today where everyone’s just rootless cosmopolitan cogs in the Machine. People like Joseph de Maistre and even Edmund Burke pointed this all out at the time though remember. It’s just that then as today those Counter-Enlightenment voices were censored and thus filtered out of the culture accordingly. De Maistre himself would be forced into exile in Russia away from his homeland and people solely because he saw through the duplicity and deception of the Enlightenment deal that was too good to be true.

So yeah the dialectic between Radical Enlightenment and its opposite in some form of proto-Fascism definitely was real, it happened then in the 19th Century as it plays itself out now as well, and it happened on some level even prior to the French Revolution. It’s just that prior to that point, the forces of Reaction and Tradition were usually always more than enough to bend the needle enough to defeat the perpetual encroachment of the Modernists. So our authors got that correct in my opinion.

Another thing our highly Semitic authors got correct, here, is their judgment of the Third Reich as historically normative. See:

Using historical analyses to elucidate the present, they show, against the background of a prehistory of subjectivity, why the National Socialist terror was not an aberration of modern history but was rooted deeply in the fundamental characteristics of Western civilization.

That’s sort of the money-quote right there in the Amazon description, because it forms the foundation for where my opinion diverges now from that of our Frankfurt School authors.

As we know, the Third Reich was deeply rooted in Western civilization obviously, and this was why it was so popular and briefly successful. This same “terror” against Jews was a permanent fixture and general pattern throughout history– and not only Western history either. The Jews actively engineer enemies against them in reaction to their behavior everywhere they go historically and currently. From Imperial Roman-era Tyre to Medieval Spanish Toledo to WWII-era Tripoli in Africa to modern-day Turkey, the Jews would be pogromed, dispossessed, and expelled throughout history. Yet this is coincidentally the one side of the story that normally Jews won’t inform their less educated audience, because it demolishes the idea of the uniqueness of The Holocaust, and then marginalizes the fact that Fascism itself (or similar forms) was/is the norm throughout history. Democracy, however, is this unproven product- especially in the context of the modern world over great geographical and national distances and multiplicities of peoples.

So the Third Reich was nothing special in this context- as I’ve talked about prior. And while these Christ-killing authors would crucify all of Europe and its history currently in order to explain this persistent “pathological” behavior, the dialectical equation resolves itself much, much more simply and satisfactorily indeed by looking simply at what the Jews did themselves to deserve such reaction- again and again and again throughout history. Yet collectively Jews can never be at fault either in modernity- so says Jews, who remember from above are Democracy’s new priest-class and “experts”. This is because the Jews’ faultless nature was more or less the first premise accepted under the new Enlightenment conditions imposed as said prior from above upon an unsuspecting population. Immediately upon the aftermath of the French Revolution, even Napoleon figured out quite quickly at his Paris Sanhedrin that collectively, legally, Jews were untouchable basically. They could no longer be dealt with in accordance with traditional corporate expulsion or collective punishment for their criminal and antisocial behavior. They were neither a polity nor religion now in the eyes of the Enlightenment, but mere individuals legally incapable of conspiracy essentially. Jews would then use England to undermine Napoleon financially and eventually militarily.

Treating the Jews individually rather than collectively was the first Enlightenment plank and belief objectively, because post-Enlightenment the Jews would use this new status-quo to blind us to the reality of Jewish subversion, co-option, and eventual domination. Rather, the Enlightenment’s new “social contract” guaranteed Jews’ newfound freedom as individuals on the basis of their individuality legally rather than as a corporate body as Jews were judged prior in pre-modernity and as Hitler judged them by default more or less under the Third Reich. So in conclusion, we must realize that there was an important dialectic in Enlightenment as Adorno and Horkheimer declare. The people are constantly trying to get out of this ideological trap whether they realize it or not, but the Jews still today are always socially-engineering the masses back into the paradigm where the people because of the paradigm’s perimeters cannot detect let alone admit and declare this Jewish conspiracy- nor can the people even really stand up for themselves collectively either as we’ve seen. So we agree with the authors on the dialectic itself, but we part ways with their analysis when they prejudge the reaction (i.e. the Fascism) as pathological and unnatural, because we understand that these repeated reactions are completely natural and in accordance with the will of the people collectively.

Thoughts? Observations? Criticisms? Suggestions for future book reviews or biographies? Normally I don’t have enough time to be doing this as it’s hard enough to find enough time just to read these books myself let alone outline their basic contents formally in front of an audience, but I had that today and so I may again in the future. As I said above briefly, we need to have standardized arguments already ready to rebut these sorts of familiar Jewish declarations, and I hope to eventually put down more of them to posterity.

As we covered in Part I of our review of Kushner Inc. by Vicky Ward, the rise of the Kushner Crime Family was meteoric after they’d arrived from Eastern Europe following WWII.

Jared Kushner’s father Charlie grew the Kushner Company’s New Jersey real estate empire at a phenomenal rate after he took over from his father by using fraud and corruption.

Unfortunately, Charlie’s brother Murray, relegated to a powerless position in the family, got angry and sued him for ripping him off and then insulting him.

At the same time, Charlie had gotten his first bought and paid for governor elected.

This internecine war would have remained private were it not for unforeseen extraneous events that all happened around the same time. The first of these was Jim McGreevey’s election to the governorship of New Jersey in November 2001. McGreevey, the former mayor of Woodbridge Township, was rumored to be corruptible and in Charlie’s pocket, since Charlie had been his top campaign donor, contributing $1.5 million. The two men had traveled together in 2000 to Israel, where McGreevey met a young Israeli political aide named Golan Cipel. A short time later, Cipel and McGreevey became clandestine lovers. Charlie sponsored Cipel’s visa to the U.S. and housed him in an apartment on New York City’s Upper West Side. (The couple often visited the Jersey Shore and sometimes stayed at Charlie’s beach house.) As soon as McGreevey was elected governor, he appointed Cipel as his homeland security adviser, and it wasn’t long before chatter about their relationship began.”

Yes, “Golan Cipel” is a male Jew.

McGreevey was a closeted Irish Catholic homosexual (who is now an openly gay episcopal priest).

Real cute couple, courtesy of the Kushner Company Israeli Love Tour matchmaking program.

The book doesn’t note this part, but Kushner actually sponsored Cipal’s visa, and he was investigated by the media (and presumably the federal government) as a possible spy after McGreevey publicly announced that he had brought in a member of the Israeli Defense Forces to be his security advisor.

This was in 2002, months after 911, in New Jersey. 

That story is deserving of its own book.

Charlie expected payback for his campaign donation, and McGreevey did not disappoint. In 2002, he offered Charlie the chairmanship of the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, which would have put Charlie in charge of the board that oversees all the bridges and tunnels between the two states, as well as several seaports and airports. It would have given him control of billions of dollars of real estate.

…

Charlie Kushner never got to properly accept the Port Authority job. In February 2003, the U.S. attorney’s office in Newark opened an investigation into claims Charlie had illegally used company money to make political donations.

That would be the entrance of Mr. Christie.

With the feds moving in, and an ongoing feud with his brother, Charlie decided that it was important to get his sister, Esther, on his side.

Thus the infamous thing was done.

He decided to coerce Esther into dropping her support of Murray and instead side with him. His plan was brutal, bizarre, and criminal. He offered a cop, Jimmy O’Toole, who was dating Plotkin and was about to retire, twenty-five thousand dollars to set up [Esther’s husband] Billy with a prostitute and film the encounter.

O’Toole was said to be reluctant at first, but eventually, in early December 2003, he reportedly had his brother, a private investigator named Tommy, set up a video camera in a digital alarm clock in a room at the Red Bull Inn, a motel on New Jersey’s Route 22. A short time later, a blond prostitute introduced herself to Billy while he was lunching in a diner in Bridgewater. She said she had car trouble and was hoping he would help her. Billy gave her a lift to the motel and took her number. The following day, he returned to the Red Bull Inn and was filmed getting a blowjob from her.

Charlie and Stadtmauer laughed while they watched the clandestine video of that sex act in a conference room at the Florham Park offices, and Charlie asked for copies.

A few days later, O’Toole reportedly went to Charlie’s home in Livingston, where, in front of Seryl, Charlie told him to set up [Bob] Yontef the same way.

Bob Yontef was an accounting manager at the firm who was helping Murray sue Charlie.

I actually didn’t even know he tried to do the trick to someone else.

The book says that Charlie was allegedly talking about using a hitman and that it was his very religious wife’s idea to do the hooker thing. One thing that you realize when you’re looking at the Jews is that the more religious they are, the more prone to anti-social behavior they are. It’s the opposite of what some boomer Christian Zionist would tell you about Jews. Not that atheist Jews aren’t a problem, of course, but religious Jews have this constant religious imperative to do everything they can to Jew over everyone. The Kushners are uniquely observant for New York money Jews and also uniquely bad.

I also had not heard this part.

Meanwhile, the feds kept asking questions and started hearing wild stories about Charlie’s private life, which Yontef’s lawyer, Theodore Moskowitz, was told about. Investigators—and a number of Charlie’s social circle—started to hear that Charlie liked to go to New York City at night under an alias, John Hess. He was rumored to sleep with men and hire prostitutes.

This is not surprising. All Jews seem to have some form of homosexual pathology.

It is very obvious in Jared Kushner, who I would simply assume is himself involved in various homosexual activities.

This also explains the seemingly strange nature of Jim McGreevey, a hetrosexually married Irish boy (in their divorce, his wife claimed she hadn’t known he was a homosexual when they married), somehow ending up with a gay lover in Israel. This was clearly a gay sex bonding and blackmail tour (a shame that Ward didn’t at least hint at this obvious conclusion – I guess she was shy).

Overlaying the gay mafia with the Jewish mafia makes Kushner twice as powerful.

In May 2004, right before her son Jacob’s engagement party, Esther opened a large envelope that had been stuffed into her mailbox and found the video of Billy’s rendezvous. She went to the FBI and warned Murray not to go home because she was afraid Charlie was so unhinged that he would kill him.

Two months later, on July 13, Charlie was arrested on charges of conspiring to coerce an individual to travel across state lines for prostitution, retaliating against a witness, and impeding justice.

Why would you bring the hooker across state lines?

I guess at the point that you’re doing brutal witness retaliation, it doesn’t really even matter where the hooker is from. You’re too deep in to be minding such details.

But the plot itself was just insane and/or retarded. Instead of being turned, Esther just called the FBI and told them what Charlie did.

The reaction of most Kushner family members was that Charlie had done this to himself. But Jared blamed everyone except his father, and his misplaced anger only grew stronger throughout the years. “His siblings stole every piece of paper from his office, and they took it to the government…,” he would say in an interview with New York magazine’s Gabriel Sherman. “Siblings that he literally made wealthy for doing nothing. He gave them interests in the business for nothing. All he did was put the [blackmail] tape together and send it. Was it the right thing to do? At the end of the day, it was a function of saying ‘You’re trying to make my life miserable? Well, I’m doing the same.’”

Wow, hard Jared, huh?

I had never seen that quote either. Here’s the original source.

As Christie was putting the full weight of his body on Charlie, the entire Kushner family was afraid Charlie was going to start murdering them.

Although it is generally assumed that Charlie made the decision not to go to trial based on the fact that no one was going to be sympathetic to someone who set his own brother-in-law up with a hooker and mailed the tape to his sister, Ward notes that there is another possible explanation: rumor is that Christie’s office sent a fax to Charlie with details of his gay sex agenda under the codename of John Hess. Obviously, Kushner couldn’t have that blowing up when he’d molded his entire family patriarch role around the idea that he’s a strong family man.

Strong family man does not jive with homosexual street prowler.

Kushner was eventually forced to give up Governor McGreevey as part of his criminal empire. This was probably what Christie was angling for the entire time, as taking down the governor was a lot bigger deal than taking down some slimy Jew slumlord.

In front of the group, he called New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey. “Jim, I’ve got to give you up,” he said, according to someone who was present. “You’re going to be outed any day now. Chris Christie wants you. He’s using me to get to you, and he knows everything.”

It also came out that part of Charlie’s conspiracy with McGreevey was to get the government to subsidize him buying the New York Nets. This Jew really was just trying to eat the entire world in one bite.

Furthermore, allegedly on the orders of Charlie due to the Nets deal falling through, Golan Cipel was suing McGreevey for sexual harassment, alleging that he was not the homosexual and that McGreevey was the real homosexual. He didn’t bother to explain why he traveled from Israel to take a job with someone he’d met during his vacation if that person was sexually harassing him. But he didn’t have to explain that. It was just about the drama of being outted as a homosexual.

The level of criminality involved here is absolutely astonishing.

And just imagine that after all of this, Charles Kushner was able to succeed in making his son – and thus himself – the most powerful Jew in America.

None of the information in this book was covered by the media during Trump’s campaign or the first two years of his presidency, for what I assume are obvious reasons. It is all just so Jewish it’s hard to wrap your head around. I’m shocked that they let this book be published now. But clearly, it was all planned before Trump totally rolled over, and I guess Ward pitched this book and some Jews decided it was okay to drop this bomb.

Governor McGreevey was able to resign under the pretense of being a persecuted homosexual and Charlie pled guilty to retaliating against a cooperating witness and various other charges. He was sentenced to 24 months in federal prison.

Interestingly, he was not send to the “very Jewy” prison that Michael Cohen landed in, which implies that he was generally hated by other Jews.

Being something of an outcast from mainstream Jewish society explains why Charles Kushner decided to go all in with the Trump thing, which was so despised by the overwhelming majority of American Jews.

Charlie started a tefillin program inside prison for all the Orthodox Jewish men. (According to tradition, this meant that once a day, except on Saturdays, they’d pull out the black boxes containing scrolls of parchment with verses from the Torah.) Charlie went through a substance-abuse program so he could leave prison early and complete his sentence at a halfway house in Newark. According to a source, during his stay there, Charlie was permitted to work from a nearby office, where Cory Booker, who became Newark mayor around that time and is now a U.S. senator, would meet with him on the stairway. (Charlie had steered fifty thousand dollars to Booker’s first, failed run for Newark mayor in 2002. Booker’s opponent, four-term mayor Sharpe James, said Booker was “collaborating with Jews to take over Newark.”)

Booker the shabbos negro.

He is also rumored to be a homosexual (and just very obviously is one), so there could have been another thing going on there as well.

Regarding Charlie doing a substance-abuse program – there is no mention of him actually having a substance-abuse problem. So it appears that he faked a substance abuse problem so that he could go through the program and then get released into a halfway house early.

Again: levels of Judaism that shouldn’t even be possible.

It soon became widely repeated that Charlie wanted to implement a grand rehabilitation plan suggested to him by the guru of New York real estate public relations, Howard Rubenstein. It was audacious, but brilliant. First, buy a trophy asset in Manhattan and shift his center of operations from New Jersey to New York City. Second, buy a newspaper or publication, ostensibly owned by Jared. Third, have Jared date someone prominent.

So, with Rubenstein’s help, Jared went shopping for a media property. The main aim was to have a voice, a way to flex power. The pair settled on The New York Observer, which had downsized its print edition and was losing roughly two million dollars every year. “They bought the Observer because [Charlie] didn’t like the articles about him in the Newark Star-Ledger,” said Hammer. The Kushners thought it wouldn’t hurt to have their own outlet.

When Charlie got out of prison, he started hiring people he was in prison with and their relatives. He also hired the new gay lover of the former governor. Again, you have these overlapping mafias in a criminal underworld situation.

Much of the characterization of Jared is as a worshiper of his father.

A story, perhaps apocryphal, that made the rounds in the New York real estate world was that during one meeting in New York, Jared walked in and, upon learning that Charlie had hurt his foot, took off his father’s sock and kissed it.

It is not difficult at all to see how it is that Charlie Kushner is the real brains behind the Trump White House.

Probably, all of everything that is happening is coming straight from him, getting funneled through Jared, then Ivanka, straight to the president’s desk.

I literally think that is exactly what is happening.

In Part III of this review, we will look at the book’s analysis of the entrance of Ivanka Trump into the Kushner Crime Family.

I will be doing a detailed review of the book “Kushner, Inc.: Greed. Ambition. Corruption.”, a newly released Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump biography by Vicki Ward in a multipart series here on the Daily Stormer.

Before we get into the meat of it, I will give some general comments on the book.

With regards to the accuracy, the book is heavily sourced. There are pages and pages of book and news article sources in the back of this book. Further, several major persons went on record, including a former Kushner Company executive, Alan Hammer.

However, many of the main sources are anonymous sources, a newsmedia practice that people are rightly critical of. That said, many of them are anonymous only by technicality. Ward tacitly admitted that Steve Bannon was a big source in a recent interview with Democracy NOW!, even though he wasn’t technically on the record. He’s obviously a somewhat biased source, but biased against her own liberal agenda. So the fact that she indicated she relied heavily on him indicates she was doing her best to be objective.

The whole book reads as if she is doing her very best to be objective. Unlike the alleged investigative journalism books of Bob Woodward and Michael Wolff, you don’t even detect a political slant reading this book. (Woodward literally begins the preface of “Fear” by lecturing the reader about the importance of free trade with South Korea.)

Furthermore, it is clear from the outset that Kushner, Inc. is not simply a salacious rumors document, because virtually everything in the book is about Jews. In order to invent or indulge the things she writes in this book about the Jews, Ward would have to be a Nazilike anti-Semite, which I seriously doubt she is.

The book is written in the standard way of mass market nonfiction, which is devoid of stylized prose. Its form is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator, so it reads like a long Reuters article. Though the language is not enjoyable, it is not vulgarly utilitarian. The prose is on par with Bob Woodward’s Trump book, but unlike with Bob Woodward’s Trump book, you’re not bogged down trying to sift through made-up bullshit. Ward’s information is arranged in a cogent manner, and it is the information itself that is the enjoyable part. I found myself laughing out loud at least once per page at how cartoonishly Jewish this family is.

The book is being marketed as an anti-Trump book, but Donald Trump is a peripheral character. This is quite simply the story of an Eastern European Jewish crime family’s successful execution of a decades old plot to undermine the US government and nation as revenge for the Holocaust. Before reading this book, I knew that Jared Kushner was an ultra-Zionist Jew, but I simply was not prepared for just how Jewish he and his people are. I will try to pull out the best quotes from the book illustrating that point, but there is no way I can go through even a percentage of the Jewish trickery, schemes, perversions and bizarre, compulsive neurosis documented in this book, so I highly recommend that everyone go purchase a copy of it.

The first sentence in this book has to do with Jews. And it just never stops from there.

This is the opening paragraph:

On almost any other Friday night, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner would have been at home with their three children, celebrating Shabbat. But this Friday night was different: the couple had received a rabbinical dispensation to attend the inaugural balls in Washington, D.C.

The setting then moves to DC Trump International Hotel, where Jared’s father is lecturing his younger son Josh about how he has to break up with his trophy shiksa Karlie Kloss because she isn’t Jewish.

After that introduction, which sets the stage for just how Jewish this all is, the next chapter begins the history of the Kushner dynasty.

And that history begins where all Jewish history begins: with the Holocaust.

In 1949, Jared Kushner’s grandparents, Joseph and Rae Kushner, arrived by ship in New York City, along with their infant daughter, Linda. After fleeing Poland and spending three years in a refugee camp in Italy, the Kushners were finally about to begin their new lives in America. Yet the scars the couple bore from World War II were visible in every aspect of their lives—and would also be seen in the lives of their children and grandchildren. “Everything we did was against the relief of the Holocaust,” one family member explained. “Surviving, growing, getting rich, power, politics … this was all to spite the Nazis, to spite what they did to us.”

Shockingly, the Kushner family’s escape from Germans in Poland sounds like something out of Indiana Jones.

Rae Kushner was in a ghetto with 30,000 other Jews, and she alleges that in 1943, her mother and one of her sisters were shot dead by the German Nazis, who were systematically (over the course of years) killing all the Jews in the ghetto.

Rae, along with her father, brother, and another sister, teamed up with other Jews and began to dig a tunnel out of the ghetto, hoping to reach a nearby forest. The chances of escape were minuscule, but they reasoned it was far better to die together, trying. “We had heard there were Jews in the woods who were not starving,” Rae recalled. “We could not imagine how you could live through the winter in the woods with the snow and the cold and the wet weather, but we decided that anything was better than staying here and waiting for a bullet.”

It’s amazing that out of 30,000 people in the ghetto, it was the Kushners who came up with the idea to dig a tunnel and meet up with the forest Jews.

Rae Kushner met Joseph Berkowitz in the makeshift Jewish bunker that they managed to stumble across in the woods. They developed a relationship over the nine months they were hiding out there in a hole in the ground.

When the war ended, they decided that Poland just wasn’t the same anymore, so they pretended to be Greeks and fled to Italy, where they were married in a refugee camp.

Jospeh did the modern thing and took Rae’s name. Not because he was modern, mind you. These are very orthodox Jews. He did it because she came from a much richer and more important Jewish family.

Just a hilarious note here, not included in Vicky’s book: Rae Kushner was featured in Stephen Spielberg’s “Shoah Foundation” Holocaust archive project, which served as the source material for my favorite Holocaust documentary, “Last Days of the Big Lie.”

The newlywed Kushners were in the Italian camp for three years – and Rae had a daughter during that time – before they were finally given a visa to go to America.

Thus it was that a penniless family from rural Belarus would begin the American Dynasty that would someday control the White House.

When they arrived, they landed straight in Brooklyn, where Rae popped out three more kids – for a total of two boys and two girls – and Jospeh just wandered straight into the real estate industry when he started building buildings after having taught himself how to do that.

Fortunately, due to his great carpentry skills, he was offered work in New Jersey, where his family’s empire would be based.

The Kushners became part of a group of Holocaust-surviving Jewish real estate families that were referred to as the “Holocaust Builders.” The Jews were transforming lovely agricultural land in New Jersey into suburban ghettoes at an alarming rate.

Regrettably, Holocaust Builders do not have a good reputation.

A 1980 series in The Times of Trenton noted that some of the Kushner-owned construction projects “brought criticism and lawsuits over allegedly faulty construction or inadequate upkeep of apartments.” Some of the buildings in one development were lopsided. In another, the grading was off, so backyards flooded when it rained.

But at least they stuck to good old-fashioned Jewish family values.

The flip side of that tight familial bond was a deep mistrust of outsiders, not only non-Jews, but also assimilated or secular Jews. Joe and Rae’s wartime experience created a sense of exceptionalism that was both good and bad, according to one Kushner, who talked to me on the strict promise of anonymity for fear of reprisal from a family known to be as punitive as it is private. The family mantra is “Think like an immigrant, act like an immigrant,” this person said. “But what does that mean?”

“The Kushners’ experience was unusual in the sense that … they were fighters,” explained Jewish scholar and historian Michael Berenbaum, who knew Rae. Their “experience was not a passive victimization, but an active attack on the enemy, and thwarting the enemy.… You didn’t survive being a [fighter] without being tough as nails.” A person in that situation grew up being taught that rules are for other people. “You don’t wait for the Nazis to come liquidate you. You build a fucking tunnel and get out of the ghetto.… You don’t wait for the bastards at Harvard to let you in. You make it yourself into Harvard,” the family member said. According to Berenbaum, the Kushners would have not been alone among Holocaust survivors in feeling this way. For those people, he explained, “rules are dangerous.”

This is the entire theme of the family: “to take revenge on the Nazis, we must do whatever we need to do to screw over whoever is around us and not doing so will destroy us.”

I think that is basically the logic of all Jews.

Joe nurtured competition between his eldest, Murray, and Charlie, Jared’s father.

Charlie was intent on ascending to the throne of the Kushner empire, and when his older brother’s wife died of breast cancer, he took a shot at him while he was down.

Murray remarried to a non-religious Jew, Lee Serwitz, and Charlie used that to defeat him.

Charlie smartly married a very religious woman, and she helped him destroy his brother’s standing in the family.

In his romantic life, Charlie went in the opposite direction. Seryl Stadtmauer was a beautiful brunette from an Orthodox family in the Far Rockaway neighborhood of Queens, New York. She and Charlie had met in their teens. When they married, Charlie became more observant to appease both his wife and his skeptical father-in-law.

…

Seryl remained the more religious of the two, and it became evident she found her sister-in-law’s relaxed attitude toward her faith vexing. Lee had no idea how to keep a kosher household, for example, so Seryl, who lived closer to her than any of the others in the family, would pop over to educate her. Despite this, or maybe because of it, the two women never got on. “Seryl was just really fucking mean,” one person who is close to Lee said. At first, Lee tried to brush her ignorance off as a joke. She would tell her friends that when Seryl said to her, “Shavua tov”—Hebrew for “have a good week”—Lee responded, as if Seryl had sneezed, “Bless you.” But the underlying friction was anything but funny. In fact, it would be the wedge that would help split the brothers.

In 1985, having officially secured his position as head of the family, Charlie opened the first offices of Kushner Company. Joe Kushner died before he was able to see the second, much more grand office.

As the company expanded, Charlie kept it incestously Jewish, and used that incest, Jew situation to abuse his friends and extended family.

Hiring relatives and friends—members of the Livingston shul (synagogue) and the Hebrew Academy—became a typical Charlie practice, one that occasionally backfired. He hired his brother-in-law William (Billy) Schulder—Esther’s husband—only to discover him having sex on the conference room table with the office bookkeeper and chief financial officer, Marci Plotkin. (Plotkin said this was “an outright lie.”) Charlie fired Schulder and Plotkin, a ferociously hard worker, but kept her close (and quiet) by getting her a job at Schonbraun, Safris, McCann, Bekritsky & Co., the accounting firm Kushner Companies used. Of course, the knowledge of what had happened gave him leverage over both of them. Viewed one way, hiring your friends and family is an act of generosity. But it also meant Charlie held “ownership” over all his extended relatives and neighbors, which meant he could treat them however he pleased. And he did.

Charlie’s business practices are described as reckless and ridiculous, but he always made money – somehow.

Jared was his eldest, and Charlie chose him to be his heir. His brother Josh was less serious and his other two children were female.

“I want to be the most powerful Jew in America,” Ward quotes Charlie as having told a business associate.

And that’s exactly what he did.

Charlie began funding politicians, including Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton. Beginning in the mid 1990s, he started engaging in large scale fraud so he could pour money into this agenda.

A Kushner family member is quoted as saying: “[Charlie] had a messianic complex. It was his father who delivered us from Poland, and [Charlie] was going to deliver us to Manhattan. He’s going to get us out of New Jersey and onto the Forbes 500 list. But to do that … you’ve gotta buy [Governor] Jim McGreevey.”

Kushner-owned McGreevey won the election for governor of New Jersey in 2001.

Charlie was also aggressively ripping off his siblings as part of his power-grabbing agenda.

All of the LLCs passed down by Joe Kushner were, per the instructions of his will, equally divided among Charlie and his three siblings, and their respective children’s trusts. But Charlie set up a management company, Westminster Management, and made himself the manager of all the buildings.

…

He invited politicians to speak (often for a large fee) in an assortment of venues, ranging from his office to his home, off-site conferences, and his synagogue. (He even invited the entire New Jersey political leadership to attend a Kushner baby’s bris.) A speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for example, cost as much as one hundred thousand dollars, and Charlie paid him to speak in New Jersey four times.

There is some detail in the book about the various tax swindles Charlie Kushner was running, taken from court documents. It’s fascinating stuff. Basically, they would write off expenses from one project on another project’s taxes. Apparently, the company’s written records were so fraudulent that senior executives started using a secret letter code to try and mark falsified expenses so they could maintain some understanding of the actual performance of properties.

The vitriolic way in which the Jews are portrayed as interacting with one another is extremely enlightening and hilarious.

Stadtmauer and Charlie’s mantra was that there must be no paper trails, no record of what they were doing. Stadtmauer frequently reminded Zecher to be careful what he put in emails. One time, according to court records, an interim CFO, Alan Lefkowitz, sent an email asking if he should pay for the construction of a local mikvah with funds from one of the partnerships. Charlie went berserk. He printed out the email and handwrote on it, “This guy is a definite moron. We must deal with the situation.” (Lefkowitz would soon be barred from the Tuesday meetings; he later resigned because he wasn’t willing to go along with the firm’s creative accounting.)

Lefkowitz was not the only person to find the culture of the firm unpleasant, according to another former employee. “Charlie ran the place like a dictator,” this person said. He also noted that the brutal office conditions were at odds with the image of a pious, Orthodox Jewish firm presented to outsiders. (One person remembered the scurrying that was done, to appear to be a religious firm should a rabbi or someone Orthodox stop by, was almost comical. “All of a sudden, the religious books would come onto the table, [Charlie] would put on a yarmulke, and they would wait there and make it look as if they are religious Jews.”)

Despite his professed liberal political views, Charlie was apparently not a big believer in diversity. Everyone at the firm was Jewish, except for some of the administrative staff, several of whom were attractive white women, hired, so it was thought by at least one senior executive, for their looks.

…

The Tuesday meetings became known as the “Tuesday beatings.” No one was supposed to go to the restroom during one, even though the meetings could run as long as three hours. And anything could set Charlie off. One time he was livid that someone was using a Montblanc pen—made in Germany—and accused that individual of bringing “Nazi paraphernalia into his home.”

…

Stadtmauer got beat up by Charlie more than anyone else. In one of those Tuesday meetings, Charlie accused Stadtmauer of being anti-Semitic because he drove a Lincoln Continental. (Henry Ford, whose Ford Motor Company introduced the car in 1939, was a notorious anti-Semite.)

Jared Kushner is so Jewish that Bibi Netanyahu would literally sleep in his bed (Jared would sleep in the basement). Bibi would be invited over to the Kushner home by Charlie, and Jared would be in all the discussions.

Funny how the leader of Israel would be comfortable getting so close to an organized crime family.

Jared is also so Jewish that he got into Harvard in the standard Jewish way.

Around the time Jared was applying to colleges, Charlie pledged $2.5 million to Harvard and made additional promises to Princeton and Cornell. He also got New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg, who was an investor in at least one of his projects and to whom Kushner Companies had donated more than two hundred thousand dollars, to make a call to Senator Ted Kennedy, who, in turn, phoned Harvard’s dean of admissions. When Jared was accepted at Harvard, his high school teachers were aghast, alternating, according to a student, between disbelief and disgust.

Man, it sure is easy being Jewish.

Can you imagine?

In Part II of this review, we will look at the book’s analysis of the fall of the Charlie Kushner criminal empire.

Gregory Hood
Waking Up from the American Dream
San Francisco: Counter-Currents, 2016

A friend of mine and fellow traveler of ours can trace his ancestry in America all the way back to the colonial period. His ancestors’ bones are interred in a old neighborhood in one of our oldest cities. Undoubtedly, they were laid to rest by a community that was very much like themselves, a European one. But were you to visit that area today, it would be unclear what country you were in—that is, until you realize the ethnic composition of the area could only be possible (until very recently) in just one country, the United States of America. Today, his ancestors are buried beneath a sweltering mass of non-white colonists from the global south, who have come there to acquire marginal economic improvements in their standard of living at the invitation and support of the government. Should affairs in this country proceed business as usual, we and our descendants will meet the same fate, being buried in a land which is neither for our posterity nor mourning us. And this was all made possible by the founding “ideas” of this country.

This is the kind of punch Gregory Hood lands in Waking Up From the American Dream, his first book, which Counter-Currents published in May 2016. Waking Up is a collection of essays with one overarching and crucial theme, critique of the American experiment from an identitarian or nationalist perspective. Hood’s America is one that we are all familiar with—an America of materialism, junk culture, social and familial disintegration, and White demographic displacement—but what he identifies as the root cause of all this rot is sure to be a bitter pill for conservatives and constitutionalists.

Ideas can structure a government, but they do not make a nation. Hood argues persuasively that America’s reliance on ideas and not identity to define itself is what led to our decline. One idea in particular standards at the forefront, “All men are created equal.” It’s an idea that many an observer, including Hood, have noted the Founding Fathers could have only believed in cynically. They owned slaves. They were “racists” and “white supremacists,” as anyone with a college education could tell you. They believed in an aristocratic republic where only a minority of the population was allowed to vote, on the basis of their sex, race, property, and in some states, religion. A citizen in ancient Athens had more access to the franchise than one in the early republic. But despite these founding contradictions, the idea of equality and of America as a land of equality has been dutifully executed and brought to its logical conclusion in the current year, which is one of Hood’s many crucial insights.

Once you bundle a set of ideas into an ideology, there is a certain direction it must follow. It becomes a self-fulfilling project, a prophecy, a living document. This is precisely the problem Hood identifies with the civic ideology widely believed in by conservatives. A society which holds equality to be its central paradigm is not going to allow inequalities or the people who notice them to persist unmolested. It will have to do something about them. And so it has. All of the faults we find in our contemporary “America,” or a very great deal of them, are products of this 200-years-and-counting process of implementing and perfecting the claims made in our founding documents, whether by the government itself, or by those who take stock in American mythology. The Dept. of Housing and Urban Development that puts non-whites into vanilla suburbs at your expense and the Army your grandfathers proudly served in are part of the same monster.

In the first third of Waking Up, the case for our need to separate ourselves as a people from the legal abstraction of the United States comes into focus. Hood explains how the historical American nation—that is to say Europeans—thrived and accomplished great things on this soil not because of our yellowed parchment or magic dirt but in spite of them. Waking up does not mean we have no usable past, it means a reinterpretation of that past without the lens of classical liberalism. Indeed, Hoods notes that the Constitution was expressly written for “ourselves and our posterity,” as in the Preamble, but this implied national identity has proven insufficient. We can no longer afford to take our possession of this country, any country, for granted. It has to be staked and claimed.

The latter parts of Hood’s book tackle the issues of establishment conservative impotence and the pseudo-identity politics that Republicans have run with over the last few decades. We are shown a Beltway right that is more interested in social status than getting its hands dirty, and hucksters and hacks who sell White conservatives god and liberty rather than a homeland. Hood says we need to overcome these, and he is right. The “Beltway Rambos,” as he calls them in one essay, have had ample opportunities to defend their religious beliefs and property rights, but all they have done is lose. They are little more than controlled opposition in the anti-white System that Hood argues has been screwing us over for a long time.

Waking Up is the kind of book you should read in public—that cover could be about anything. It’s the kind of book you should pass on to your conservative acquaintances who don’t hate themselves. It’s part of a growing corpus of accessible, succinct, and compelling nationalist literature that equips our people with the mindset and paradigms they need to assert themselves. It is a message they need to hear. Every year, no, every day we let pass without working to build resistance to this penal colony we call a country will only make things harder for us.

On June 1, 2016, the Massachusetts House of Representatives voted 116-36 Wednesday to legally abolish the category of biological sex in favor of “gender identity.” The co-sponsor of the Gender Identity Public Accommodations Bill (H.4343), Rep. Byron Rushing, had this to say: “We are doing the work the founders of our nation intended for us to do. This is a great day for us and we should be very proud.”

Isn’t it time you stopped hitting the snooze button?

The leprous spawn of scattered Israel
Spreads its contagion in your English blood;
Teeming corruption rises like a flood
Whose fountain swelters in the womb of hell.
Your Jew-kept politicians buy and sell
In markets redolent of Jewish mud,
And while the ‘’Learned Elders’ chew the cud
Of liquidation’s fruits, they weave their spell.

They weave the spell that binds the heart’s desire
To gold and gluttony and sweating lust;
In hidden holds they stew the mandrake mess
That kills the soul and turns the blood to fire,
They weave the spell that turns desire to dust
And postulates the abyss of nothingness.’’

-Lord Alfred Douglas

Truth is the daughter of time.  In the end ‘the truth will out’.  It may seem unlikely, mired as we in the West are in a mass of politically correct nonsense, but it is so nonetheless.  It will just take time.  That, and some brave men willing to be martyred in the cause of Truth.  A short term view will neither acquire the necessary faith, nor the necessary martyrs.  What is needed is perspective.  History is an excellent way of obtaining it.   Gazing at mountains, I find, puts one’s troubles into perspective, while climbing mountains takes your mind off your petty troubles altogether.  Star gazing, gazing at constellations and distant galaxies however, puts one’s life in perspective, it even puts humanity into perspective.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s farewell address of 1961 may have made ‘the military-industrial complex’ a household term, but today he would be regarded as being distinctly off-message when, in that same speech, he referred to the international conflicts of the first 60 years of the 20th century as “holocausts”.  It shows how far we’ve come, or rather how far we’ve fallen, that today any reference to ‘a’ or ‘the holocaust’ that does not relate to the gassing of 6 million Jews, is regarded as near-on blasphemy and could arguably land you in prison.  Using the word in the plural, therefore, however innocently, is sheer heresy.

‘The Holocaust’, (the mass media version), is a hypnotic spell that immunizes most of our people against any manifestation of politically-incorrect thought.   Indeed it is becoming increasingly effective at preventing any serious or important thought at all whatsoever.  Any evidence of such thinking, any politically – incorrect thinking at all,  is met with the charge that such musings are evil, because eventually such thoughts will inevitably lead to  ’ a new holocaust’.  As such, the Holocaust myth is Jewry’s most powerful weapon, because rather like a farmer with a cattle prod, or a mesmerist with hypnosis, they use it to control us.

Some of us however do not like being controlled and because of that, the Holocaust is also their most vulnerable weakness, for while it may deter cowards, careerists and simpletons from thinking, it actually spurs those who place the highest value on truth, fair play or honour, in other words the best of our people, to begin thinking in directions diametrically opposed to political correctness.  Those who realise they or their countrymen are being surreptitiously hypnotized are, if they have a conscience, apt to feel anger and suspicion towards the hypnotists.  They are apt to ask themselves just how and why they are being hypnotized.

It happens something like this:  a good man hears there is some controversy regarding ‘the Holocaust’ narrative; he is piqued to hear that people who challenge the establishment version of events suffer persecution; he investigates;  he discovers that the Hollywood version is a complete and utter fabrication;  he then realises that in order to hood-wink the entire Western World, the liars must have an immense amount of power; he then asks ‘who benefits’ from this lie?;  cui bono?;  he asks himself who has been responsible for pushing this lie?;  he comes to the conclusion that ‘the Jewish power’ is responsible;  he investigates this Power; he wonders what else he has been lied to about and what other fallacies the Western World believes;  he investigates the agenda of this Jewish Power and discovers that it will lead to the destruction of all he holds dear;  he becomes very uneasy and realises that this is the first time in his life that he has been truly awake; he comes to the conclusion that he must fight this Power with all his might and all the means at his disposal and that the best way he can do this is to wake up the rest of his race.  It’s a journey that a very many, many of our race’s brightest and best are on.

I’m sitting in a central London restaurant and I’m here to meet a good man, one of England’s brightest and best, Dr Nicholas Kollerstrom a professional science historian – he’s also a star gazer.  This astronomer is the author of ‘Terror on the Tube’’, (the book examining the possibility that the 7/7 London bombings were actually a ‘made to happen’ or ‘allowed to happen’ false flag attack), and he’s also the author of the book I’m here to interview him about today ‘Breaking the spell – the holocaust: myth and reality’.  Prior to his foray into historical revisionism, he was essentially a non-political astronomer.  Theoretically speaking, astronomy is above controversy, above human concerns, above history and above politics and this is why the victorious allies of WWII stipulated that the only sort of current affairs Rudolf Hess was allowed to study and keep up with while incarcerated in solitary confinement for all those years in Spandau was astronomy.  True Kollerstrom was tinged with a vague bohemian distrust of governments, but as a result of his awakening interest in historical revisionism he has now become a non-person to ‘The Powers That Be’ and a VIP to all sorts of radicals.  The fact that he does not have a National Socialist/ Neo-Nazi/ Nazi/ Far-right/ Fascist etc background has meant that his book and his book’s thesis have been given more attention than it otherwise perhaps would have received and has probably helped to enable the book to sold quite openly. The times indeed are a-changing.

Ensconced as I am in corner seat of the restaurant, I sit and wait unobserved.  Nick Kollerstrom, walks in and hesitates looking for me.   I forgot to add, he is also a self-confessed ‘extremist’.

The term of course in the objective sense is meaningless – comparing today with a hundred years ago shows that what is considered dangerously extreme today was run-of-the-mill then, and what was considered extreme or sheer, utter lunacy then is now enforced as normal by ever more aggressive legislation and propaganda of the liberal tyranny under which we sweat, slave and squirm.   It is this modern-day extremism that the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, raged against in a recent speech. Cameron lamented as he spoke, that it was not enough to merely clamp down on political violence and terrorism, no, it was becoming increasingly necessary to clamp down on what he called ‘non-violent extremism’ too, as this fed into and led on to forms of political violence and terrorism.  Laughable, I hear you cry?  Why not ban thought altogether and have done?   English Common Law, and the similar historic laws that exist in all lands that our race has made its home, have always been against incitement to commit acts of violence.  Politically correct legislation, however, partly using the incitement to commit violence excuse, currently makes illegal any thought that could lead to something that could lead to something else that could possibly lead on to something yet more that could in turn perhaps etc lead to violence.  In other words current politically correct legislation is about 17 steps removed from genuine incitement to violence.

Cameron’s speech, which was designed to test the water on pushing the legislation even further, was ludicrous in its implications – who for instance defines ‘extremism’?  Of course the Prime Minister is just a puppet and if he did any real thinking he would realise that banning extremism is in itself extreme.    Worryingly, for what is left of free speech, his speech met with either deafening silence or approval from the mainstream political parties, politicians and the mass media.  Nigel Farage of the UK Independence Party, perhaps sensing a move to ban his own political party, was a lone voice of dissent among major politicians.  Nicholas Kollerstrom, looking on aghast and horrified as he was by the lack of opposition to Cameron’s speech realised that a demonstrative example of the implementation of such a law, would be just the thing to reveal the idiocy it would lead to. He was swift to act and, with various cameras in tow, he promptly marched into Scotland Yard and demanded that the duty sergeant arrest him then and there as an ‘extremist’.  The rather embarrassed policeman behind the desk, after phoning higher levels for advice, politely declined to arrest Kollestrom, who as a result became something of a celebrity overnight. The incident shows what manner of man he is.

The waitress points me out to him.  He waves, bounds over and plonks himself down opposite.  He has an honest face, and keen, intelligent eyes, and, delighted to see me, is giving me a beaming, boyish smile.  I see therein integrity and detachment, it is definitely a face that belongs on the bench rather than in the dock.

And yet a shadow of suffering shades his brow, for this man has been judged, found guilty, and punished both by University College London, (UCL), which sacked him from his teaching post, and by the controllers of the mass media which demonised him. And yet he has committed no crime.  Prior to his ostracism he was a respected Astronomy Historian and has dozens of  academic papers and several books published to his credit,  including ‘Lead on the Brain’ (1982), ‘Astrochemistry’, (1984), ‘The Eureka Effect’ (1994),  ‘Newton’s forgotten Lunar Theory’, (2000), and ‘Galileo’s Astrology’ (2004).  He was elected to the New York Academy of Sciences in 1999 and has met the late Patrick Moore the presenter of The Sky at Night television programme on several occasions.  He has also contributed several biographies to the Oxford two-volume biographical ‘Encyclopeadia of Astronomers’.  And yet in April 2008, ‘the Holocaust’ swam into his ken and he was thrown off the academic staff at UCL for merely pointing out in a series of articles that certain aspects of the standard establishment schoolbook version of what happened to the Jews in the second world-war did not make any sense – did not make any sense at all.  And of course the standard version of events does not make sense, everyone knows that, but very few of course dare to say so publically.  But fifty million schoolbooks worldwide can’t be wrong, can they?  Can they?  Well, yes, easily so, especially when the national curriculums and the publishing industries worldwide are controlled by the same small coterie of people who share the same ethnic interest in ‘keeping them wrong’.

Ironically UCL prides itself on allowing free thought for its staff and students, but of course like of all of modern Western universities speech and thought there are only ‘free’ if you keep your thoughts, ideas and writings well within the increasingly constrictive politically correct consensus.  If anyone strays outside these boundaries he will, as David Irving commented on Dr Kollerstrom’s fall from grace, ‘’… have to get used to living his life in the shadows.’’

Dr Kollerstrom, however, was not content to live his life in the shadows and surprisingly still found himself welcome and tolerated among sections of the worldwide astronomical fraternity.  He has also made a name for himself in the growing ranks of those who cast doubt on the establishment’s versions of major events – a movement which has always in the past been confined to marginalised ‘far-right’, anti-Zionist tendencies, but which has recently leaped into the mainstream due to the boost given it by the 9/11 World Trade Centre attacks, the expose of the fallacious Weapons of Mass Destruction as a justification for invading Iraq, and the distinct lack of mass media outrage over the repeated carpet bombing of Gaza.

So somehow Dr Kollerstrom survived the onslaught against him and continued his researches.  This book then is the maturation of his thinking on what has become known as ‘The Holocaust’ and is unique in that for the first time it brings together all the various chemical and scientific studies which have been conducted into that event.  It is one of those ‘if you only read one book on the subject, this is the one to read’ kind of books.  But it is also a monumental work in that it combines all this with being the first study to make use of the British Intelligence decrypts that were made after the Enigma codes were broken.  ‘’I approached the Holocaust Controversy with an open mind and with no real opinion.  I was just curious what all the fuss was about.  In effect I followed the scientist’s dictum ‘No opinion until you get the primary source data’.  This I proceeded to get.’’

‘Truth isn’t in accounts it is in account books’

-Josephine Tey

After British intelligence experts cracked the enigma code in 1941 they were able to listen in to everything that the Germans did – everything.   And this included everything in all the camps, including the camps where ‘the Holocaust’ is supposed to have happened.  They listened to the comings and goings at the camps, what supplies came in, the total numbers in the camps day by day, production figures, numbers of births, numbers and causes of deaths, kilograms of fuel used etc.  The Germans were meticulous record keepers and administrators.  Everything was recorded by them and everything, literally everything, was intercepted by the British, duly recorded, decoded, transcripted, documented and stored.  And the transcripts are now available for all to see at The Public Records Office recently renamed The National Archives – only a short walk from Kew Botanical Gardens in west London.  And as yet, no establishment historians, no journalists and no pro-Zionists or pro-Zionist groups have made use of them. Nor will they.  Ever.  Not surprising really as the evidence therein explains just why no one rushes to see them, and why in fact almost everyone rushes away from them, fervently keen not to see them.  Almost everyone.  The decrypts also partly explain why the British Government was initially very reluctant to fall in with the post-war Soviet propaganda aim of concocting a Holocaust.  The simple fact is not just that there is absolutely no evidence of mass killings, but that there were no mass killings.

The transcripts from the intercepts are backed up by multiple sources, including the extensive camp records found in all the liberated camps – now held by the Soviets.   It also ties in with all the other evidence amassed by the diverse array of historical revisionists, who, often at the risk of their liberty and not infrequently their lives, have bravely launched themselves on, in Professor Faurisson’s words, ‘’a quest for historical exactitude’’.   There is, however, an inertia amongst most people making them reluctant to accept the truth.  The truth after all carries implications which are just too staggering to contemplate for the average person and the old adage by Mark Twain explains why.

‘’It is easier to dupe someone than it is for someone to admit they have been duped’’

-Mark Twain

And yet the truth has always been with us, obvious to those who have ‘eyes to see’.  After all,  The International Committee of the Red Cross states that in all the camps, and not just the so-called ‘death camps’, a total of  271,301 people died and that these deaths were from all ethnic and religious groups, and that they died from typhus, typhoid and other diseases brought on by malnutrition as a result of supply lines being disrupted by the Allied bombing campaign.  Additionally, the Red Cross records state that all ethnic and religious groups in the camps died in equal proportions, (more Catholics than Jews died at Auchwitz), and that no ethnic or religious group was targeted by being withheld food or medicine -even the guards died.

It is somewhat sobering to realise that more people died in the one night of fire-storm hell bombing of Dresden, (350,000 at a conservative estimate), than died in all the camps put together, (271,000), throughout the entire duration of the Third Reich.  In other words more people died in the destruction of Dresden than in the entire ‘Holocaust’.  Even if we don’t take into account the bombing of all the other cities, eg Hamburg etc, it is a clear fact startling to behold that a person was safer off being in the camps than he was being out of them.

I ask Kollerstrom, firstly, why he wrote the original articles in 2008 that got him into so much hot water?, and, secondly, knowing the reaction he got then why has he now dared to publish this book, ‘Breaking the Spell’?  Why in other words has he decided once more, to use Lord Alfred Douglas’s phrase, to ‘face the fury of the Jews’?

He smiles at me with that impish good humoured smile again and explains that ‘the truth is worth it’.  He adds that he feels that the tide of public opinion is at last turning, that the public is now more knowledgeable than they used to be about the discrepancies in the establishment approved versions of history, and that the same public is now, encouragingly, beginning to realise just why they have been duped.

’No Night Lasts Forever’

He goes on to explain that no academic history of science journal dares touch the Holocaust issue and he thought that he’d ‘’better do something about it’’.  And he’s right.  Science is held up by our rational, sophisticated worldview as a saviour, and held up almost as a god, or at least held up so with religious fervour.  Science is supposed to provide the one objective truth, it is supposed to lead us into the light and yet, and yet… science is only as good as the scientists.  And the scientists have, where it really mattered, failed us.

Kollerstrom adds that as he gets older he realises how important history is. He realises how powerful cowardice and laziness are and that they have to be constantly fought.  He realises how so very powerful a kind of incantation or enchantment can be.  He knows that most people live their lives under a spell of falsehood and he realises too that The Truth is of supreme importance, for, in the final analysis, only The Truth can break the spell.  Only The Truth can therefore set our people free.

‘’No blazoned banner we unfold –

One charge alone we give to youth,

Against the sceptred myth to hold

The golden heresy of Truth.’’

-George William (‘A.E.’) Russell

***

Dr Nicholas Kollerstrom ‘Breaking the Spell: The Holocaust: Myth & Reality’

ISBN: 1-59148-071-X , Castle Hill Publishers, Uckfield, England

Available from The Barnes Review, amazon.com & amazon.co.uk.

Five years ago, a book series called “Prey World” started its triumph among the dystopic science fiction books in Germany.

I found the first part “Prey World – Citizen 1-564398B-278843” searching on the Internet for new reading material and bought it because the description of the book made me curious.

The novel is about a so called “Citizen 1-564398B-278843” whose real name is Frank Kohlhaas. Presumably the name Kohlhaas is a hint of the author Alexander Merow on the figure of Michael Kohlhaas by Heinrich von Kleist, a famous rebel of classical German literature.

However, Frank Kohlhaas officially has no name, he is only a number; like everyone else in the future One-World-State he has to live in. Frank and billions of other people are disposable lackeys in a so called “World Republic” led by a criminal “World President”, who is a member of an insidious secret society called the “Lodge Brothers”.

Frank, the main character of the book series, one day interferes with the tyrannical system that rules over future “Germany” (Germany does not exist as a nation anymore because all national states have been abolished by the World Government. Only “administrative sectors” have remained). He is convicted and finally ends up in a prison for reeducation and brainwashing to make him a good “citizen” again. But Frank can escape the torture and flees to Eastern Europe where he joins a group of resistance fighters. This is the starting point of an epic story about fate, will and revolution.

Altogether, “Prey World” is a dark but very realistic vision of our future if things do not change in our present. The World Government (founded in the year 2018!) and the secret society of the “Lodge Brothers” have a clearly Zionist and Masonic character. It is their goal to destroy the highly developed civilizations of white Europe and North America with their weapons brainwashing, multiculturalism and cultural destruction. The political system still calls itself “democratic” but the One-World-State is a giant hydra of total surveillance and oppression like Oceania in Orwell`s “1984”.

The book series has seven parts (the final part will be published in the next weeks as Merow writes on his homepage). Four parts have already been translated into English by the author himself – and I think the other books will follow one day. The ebooks can be downloaded on the Internet for free.

“Prey World” is a dark and very realistic future perspective but it has also a rebellious spirit which I really like. In the third part of the series a nationalist organization rises in Belarus and Frank and his friend Alfred become members of the “Freedom Movement of the Rus”. The rebellion expands to Russia and finally becomes some kind of European revolution to save the white nations from extinction.

“Prey World” is really worth reading. A radical and likewise very exciting book series with a lot of potential for controversial discussions. And it is also a warning by the author. We will soon live in a hell on earth, a world of total surveillance, racial frictions and social decay if we remain passive in our days. In my eyes, Merow`s “Prey World” books show the reader the true face of tyranny of a New World Order that is part of our real world. The authors knows about the backgrounds of world policy and uses his knowledge to create a great novel series that has already found a lot of readers in Germany.

“Only a fool would think that “Prey World” is nothing but fiction!”, writes Alexander Merow. I think he is right…

Free download of the English translations of the books here and here.

Available in German on Amazon.

I’ve just finished reading Separation and its discontents : Towards an evolutionary theory of anti-semitism, the last of Kevin MacDonald’s major trio of works on this subject that I hadn’t read.

The book explores the nature of Judaism, arguing, convincingly to me anyway, that is not, in essence, a religion. It is, rather, a genetic lineage, and is perceived as such by Jews, in effect a eugenic experiment. The religious cloak it has donned in the modern age is simply a disguise designed to make it seem more palatable to post-Enlightenment goy. Proof of this is that there has almost never been any proselytism within Judaism, for example, that is there has never been any attempt to convert non-Jews to the “religion”. And those who have converted of their own accord have often met with hostility and ostracism. This is exactly what you would expect if Judaism was primarily about genetic purity rather than mystical truth.

Indeed, a case could be made that Judaism is the prototypical ideological racism in the world. One of the book’s most astonishing insights, to me, was the suggestion that the various kinds of ideological racism that have arisen in Europe were merely defensive responses and, crucially, mirror images, of Jewish ethnic chauvinism towards the gentiles in whose country they were living. For example, MacDonald illustrates that the conversos in Spain, Jews who appeared to convert to Christianity following the royal edict for Jews to convert or leave, continued to retain Jewish customs and to practise in-group marriage, retaining their blood purity. They also came to dominate large sectors of Spanish society, systematically discriminating against the indigenous people and favouring their kin group. The Inquisition, and the obsession with limpieza de sangre (blood purity) it helped engender, were merely defensive indigenous responses to this Jewish ethnic chauvinism and taqiyya. Something similar happened in Germany following the 19th century emancipation of the Jews. Using their higher average intelligence, they came to dominate whole sectors of society, discriminating against the out-group (Germans) and in favour of their fellow Jews. Antisemitism and, ultimately, National Socialism, were the responses this behaviour produced.

Jews have constructed a fantastical account of history in which they appear merely as innocents gliding through time, doing no wrong, simply being the helpless victims of other peoples’ motiveless hatred, a motiveless hatred that, for some curious reason, has been felt by essentially every other people they have ever encountered. This, of course, is exactly the same story that Muslims try and sell us with their “Islamophobia”. It is clear to me, reading MacDonald’s work, that this account of history is grotesquely false. “Antisemitism” has been, and is, a response to Jewish behaviour. “Islamophobia” is a response to Muslim behaviour. We are not helping either of their peoples by continuing to indulge their paranoid persecution fantasies.

Another of the book’s fascinating suggestions is that the spirit of individualism we now think of as a fundamental characteristic of European civilisation emerged first in France and Britain precisely because they did not have substantial Jewish populations. The idea is that the discriminatory, collectivist behaviour of the Jews inevitably provokes a similar response from the indigenes. Much of the country’s psychological energy is thereafter taken up by this conflict.

This has clear parallels with our own experience in modern times. Our multicultural elites claim to yearn for a society “where race doesn’t matter”. But it becomes increasingly apparent that the only society in which race doesn’t matter is one in which everyone, or almost everyone, is of the same race. Multi-racial societies inevitably dissolve into a series of contending ethnic factions.

In conclusion, it’s rare to find a book so packed with novel insights. Of course in large part this is because Jews have come to dominate European societies intellectually, politically, through media ownership, and morally through the falsified history of the 20th century from which the Jewish role in the atrocities of Communism has been carefully erased. This dominance means that almost no public criticism of Jewish conduct can be aired. Perhaps, in a normal world, the insights in MacDonald’s book would seem commonplace. As things are, they seem precious and rare.

Those of you concerned about the islamisation of Europe need to lift your eyes from the Muslims and stop reacting to the symptoms. Your daily spoonfeeding from JihadWatch and GoV isn’t going to help you understand how this catastrophe came about. Kevin MacDonald’s books will. Even though they say almost nothing about Islam, there is no richer source of insight into why Europe is being progressively islamised today. These are among the most important books of our age, and you should regard it as an imperative duty to seek them out and read them. Trying to understand contemporary events without having done so is like to trying to decipher a newspaper article in a language you don’t understand.

Two extracts from the book in which MacDonald discusses Jewish self-deception:

Whether it is deception or self-deception, the implication is that some truths are better left unstated or even unacknowledged, and regarded as pathological expressions of anti-Semitism. As Weiss says, there is moral capital to be gained by adopting an identification as an outsider. I believe that the moral capital obtained by being a psychological outsider has been a critical component of the movements of social criticism discussed in The Culture of Critique. To a very considerable extent Jewish status as outsiders has allowed them to engage in radical criticism of the moral and intellectual foundations of Western society whileretaining a perspective of their own ingroup as ethically and morally beyond reproach. But as Weiss points out and as I have tried to document extensively, ethnocentrism and hostility toward outsiders is rife among Jews, and this is exactly what would be predicted from an evolutionary perspective based on social identity theory. Moreover, Judaism, because it is characterized by high intelligence and resource acquisition ability, has produced ethnic warfare virtually wherever Jews have lived. But by retaining the view of themselves as the morally pure outsider arrayed against a pathologically antisemitic gentile society, Jews are able to simultaneously pursue their own ethnic interests and conceptualize their opponents as morally depraved (and also, as Weiss notes, as “dim-witted”). Self-deception is very useful in this warfare, because it essentially allows Jewish leaders to deny the reality of Jewish wealth and political and cultural influence.

Self-deception may also result in a sort of moral blindness which results in applying different moral standards to the outgroup compared to the Jewish ingroup. Yeshiva University students were asked about the double standard in which they support immigration of all peoples into the United States while Israel only admits Jews ( Rabbi Mayer Schiller, personal communication, December 27, 1995). The double standard had not occurred to any of these strongly identified Jews. When pressed to develop a reason, they tended to say that since Western culture had been anti-Semitic, they were justified in favoring the decline of ethnic solidarity among the European-derived people of the United States.