You have to marvel at the extraordinary qualities of the Talmudic mind. Its subtlety is such that it is able to simultaneously hold positions that, to the simple goy mind, would seem contradictory or hypocritical. Thus, it is possible for Jews to decry the hateful bigotry of goy who accuse them of waging a war on Christmas and then immediately acknowledge that they are indeed waging a war on Christmas and insist that such a war “must be fought”. Here, from another article in the Jewish Daily Forward, we begin with disgust at the crazy antisemitism of it all.

Moreover, we must not forgot that Donald Trump ran, in part, on a pro-Christmas platform. Indeed, he recently told a rally in Michigan that “We’re going to start saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again.” At the very least, this can be seen as a rejection of multiculturalism, and the implicit endorsement of a Christian nation. At worst, it’s anti-Semitism plain and simple.

As Adam Kirsch writes in Tablet, “The implied reasoning is that Americans stopped saying ‘Merry Christmas’ and started using ‘Happy Holidays’ because of the unwelcome arrival of people who did not celebrate the Christian holiday—people who forced Christian Americans to abandon a religious custom in order to cater, in politically correct fashion, to their alien sensitivities.”

“Theoretically,” he continues, it might be possible to think of Muslims or Hindus as the guilty party here. But historically, of course, it is the Jews who were the first major immigrant group to change the complexion of Christian America. For a long time, this change was minimized by the adoption of ‘Judeo-Christian’ as a new adjective for American religion. Jews, in this view, might not actually celebrate Christmas, but they could be comfortably grandfathered in as honorary members of the Christian tradition. But in recent years, this tolerance has been eroding as the notion of a ‘war on Christmas’ gains traction, to the point that even so benign a figure as Garrison Keillor could complain about the Jewish conspiracy to replace Christmas carols with non-denominational holiday songs, like ‘White Christmas.’”

Source

But the same author then goes on to admit that Jews are indeed waging a war on Christmas and why, despite Trump’s victory, this war “must be pressed” to remake and repair American culture.

The fervent opposition to any attempt at multiculturalism in the winter holiday sphere indicates exactly why this is an issue that must be pressed. Is saying Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas as important as preventing the deportations of millions of immigrants? No. Is ensuring that menorahs and other non-Christian religious artifacts populate any space with a Christmas tree as pressing as opposing the creation of a national Muslim registry? Not at all. But within the zone of the culture wars, this is one of the preeminent issues, and the attacks on the Lancaster County family shows it can have truly grievous consequences.

The War on Christmas is really a War for Inclusivity, and it is essential as we look towards remaking and repairing American culture going forward from this divisive election. To abandon multiculturalism or identity politics because Middle America rejected them is to simply surrender after years of hard work. No, the work must continue and the war must be fought. Happy holidays.

Source

Tracing the linked article back to the Tablet reveals some interesting stuff. The Jew there quotes some old stories to explain how Christmas was never really about Christ and was always just about having a good time. So the Jews aren’t to blame for that. Ah OK, thanks for setting the record straight there, Jew. He then admits Hanukkah is basically a fake holiday the Jews never really cared about but bigged up in the last 100 years or to rival Christmas.

Reading these classic Christmas tales helps to explain how American Jews could develop Hanukkah, previously a fairly minor winter holiday, into such a successful counterpart to Christmas. Religiously and ideologically, Hanukkah is just about the worst holiday possible for such a purpose—it is, after all, a story about Jews resisting assimilation by violence.

Source

Yes indeed. What would be the contemporary goy equivalent of the events that inspired the Hannukah holiday? It would probably involve the rising up of the European peoples, the massacre of their rulers, followed by the expulsion and extermination of the ethnic aliens living in their lands. A few might be allowed to remain but these would be forcibly converted to Christianity; required to listen to Wagner instead of rap; and compelled to learn Mein Kampf off by heart. That, in essence, is what Hanukkah celebrates.

That European Christians are asked to accept an implicit equivalence between, as they see it, their Saviour being born into a world in which he would later give his life to redeem humanity, and, on the other, a celebration of race war and genocide directed against their own race, is itself a moral perversion and a defilement of Christianity.

The Tablet Jew then goes on to describe another Jewish tradition: Nittel Nacht.

Compare this to the way Jews used to “observe” Christmas Eve in Eastern Europe, on what they referred to as Nittel Nacht: by holding vigil all night and refraining from Torah study, both for theological reasons and to avoid incurring the wrath of celebrating Christians. (The custom of playing dreidel may originate in the games Jews played to pass the time while locked in their houses on Nittel Nacht.) The fact that most American Jews today have never heard of this tradition is a sign of how completely our relationship to Christians and Christianity has changed for the better. That makes Christmas a holiday worth celebrating for Jews, and other non-Christians, as well.

His phrase “to avoid incurring the wrath of celebrating Christians” suggests Jews spent the night huddled in fear lest a Christian mob arrive to carry out a pogrom. I had never heard of this before and decided to look into it. Like most stories of the persecution of the Jews, I imagined this one would turn out to be a fable. And so it proved. But also very revealing.

The Talmud, with its share of rabbinic repudiations against Jesus, was never a big fan of Christmas. Call it the Grinch. Indeed, the rabbis looked at it as a day of mourning—perhaps due to the suffering that Jews encountered in Jesus’ name throughout history. And Christmas Eve—named “Nittel Nacht” by Jewish scholars in the 17th century—took on a life of its own. Some Jewish mystics were under the impression that many apostates were conceived on Christmas Eve (which is one reason the rabbis forbade sex on Dec. 24; more on that later).

In Europe, the Jewish community was victim of more acts of violence on this night. All in all, it didn’t end up being a festive evening for Jews. And so the rabbis decreed that the public study hall be closed and that no Torah learning take place on this night. I guess it’s our version of “Silent Night”—literally. The edict came about partially because of pogroms, but the leaders were also concerned about the popularly held belief in Judaism that studying the Torah brings spiritual benefit to the world at large. Many didn’t want to make this positive contribution on what they considered a “pagan” night.

Source (You should read the linked article in full)

So, you see, the tradition of Jews desanctifying and degrading Christianity goes back centuries. And some Jews still practice this Nittel Nacht ritual of defilement today.

See also an earlier article on this subject (link).

In Part One of this column about the War on Christmas, I wrote that “the Jewish dominance of Hollywood is so obvious and undeniable that Los Angeles Times’ columnist Joel Stein recently made it official. What else can you say when all eight major film studios are run by Jews.” I’ve written on this theme extensively in The Occidental Quarterly (here, here, and TOQ Spring 2008). Or you could read Jewtopia: The Chosen Book for the Chosen People, based on the surprise hit play by Bryan Fogel and Sam Wolfson. Or you could listen to  David Mamet: “For those who have not been paying attention, this group [Ashkenazi Jews] constitutes, and has constituted since its earliest days, the bulk of America’s movie directors and studio heads.”

In The Culture-Wise Family: Upholding Christian Values in a Mass Media World, Theodore Baehr and Pat Boone argued that “whoever controls the media controls the culture.” And a lynchpin of that media is Hollywood and its associated TV studios and networks.

Why does it matter that Jews control Hollywood? In essence, it matters because it represents the loss of power of one group—majority white Christians—to a group with a long history of hostility toward the people and culture of the West. Jewish control of Hollywood has been a crucial means for dispossessing majority whites from their place in the country they built. As some have argued, the twentieth century was “a Jewish century,” and much of this was because Jews controlled the image factory known as Hollywood.

Again, what Kevin MacDonald demonstrates in The Culture of Critique, cannot be repeated too often: “The Judaization of the West means that the peoples who created the culture and traditions of the West have been made to feel deeply ashamed of their own history — surely the prelude to their demise as a culture and as a people.” And, as I argued earlier, the treatment of Christmas shows how Jews “have been able to translate this hatred of Christ and his birthday into increasingly scandalous imagery, thanks to their domination of Hollywood and TV studios.”

Today I’ll talk about how that has affected the kind of Hollywood films we get with respect to Christmas. In essence, it means that in the last forty or so years, the Christian aspect of the holiday has vanished on screen. The best we can hope for is a positive, feel-good portrayal of the season, such as we had in Tim Allen’s The Santa Clause (1994) or Tom Hanks’ The Polar Express ten years later.

Too often, however, films have associated the Christmas season with negative or even horrific stories. Perhaps the best example of this is Silent Night, Deadly Night. This is a 1984 slasher film that begins with a young boy named Billy  witnessing the murder of his parents by a man dressed as Santa Claus. Billy ends up at St. Mary’s Orphanage, where he is beaten by Mother Superior. Later, morphing memories of his punishment at her hands with images of Santa, Billy grows up to become a killer teenage Santa. At work, for example, he strangles a co-worker with Christmas lights and then dispatches the girl with whom the co-worker was having sex.

After a string of other Santa murders, Billy returns to the orphanage, with the police hot in pursuit. Tragically, they shoot and kill Father O’Brien, a deaf priest dressed as Santa. Sneaking into the orphanage, Billy, dressed as Santa, swings his ax at Mother Superior, but a policeman shoots him down. Imparting his central message, Billy assures viewers, “You’re safe now… Santa Claus… is gone.” Not exactly a happy message at Christmastime.

In 1984, such imagery was still able to rile the population. Siskel and Ebert condemned the film, going “so far as to read the film’s production credits on air, saying ‘shame, shame’ after each one.” Angry mothers protested the movie around the nation, and TriStars Pictures, its distributor, quickly ceased advertising the film.

Silent Night, Deadly Night did have antecedents. Black Christmas was a 1974 movie set in a sorority house during Christmas break. A maniac is making calls from within the house, killing the coeds one by one. The movie also takes every opportunity to pair beloved Christmas songs with chilling scenes, a phenomenon that was later repeated in Gremlins, as we will see. Another, Christmas Evil (1980), features a delusional Santa stand-in who murders three church-goers in front of a church. (He stabbed one man in the eye with a toy.) Later, while wearing a ragged Santa outfit and being chased by an angry mob, our main character drives his van off a bridge, imagining himself to be Santa in his flying sleigh.

As Austin Pearl, a Jewish reviewer, approvingly wrote, “Christmas Evil ruins Christmas unlike any other movie.” In particular, this reviewer liked “all the vividly disturbing images of Santa sprinkled throughout the movie.”

It’s no surprise that Pearl also liked the 2003 Billy Bob Thorton film Bad Santa, which was a concerted ethnic effort to trash Christmas. Jewish director Terry Zwigoff made the film under producers Ethan and Joel Coen for the Disney subsidiary Miramax, run by two more Jewish brothers, Bob and Harvey Weinstein. Billy Bob Thornton stars as the bad Santa of the title, going about his life boozing and swearing with abandon. At one point he has anal sex with an overweight woman in a changing room, while elsewhere he goes to a mall drunk and destroys a reindeer display in a drunken rage. Ho ho ho.

Near the end of this dark film, he is shot by a group of policemen but survives. Despite his obvious guilt in numerous crimes, he is pardoned because “the Phoenix police department shooting an unarmed Santa Claus in front of children was more fucked up than Rodney King.”

According to Wikipedia, critics described it as an “evil twin” of Miracle on 34th Street, the inspirational Christmas classic.  No wonder Austin Pearl wrote glowingly that “Bad Santa is perhaps the most subversive, offensive Christmas movie ever made—with Thornton as a truly despicable character who, for once, does not receive a total personality transplant by the movie’s end.”

Director Zwigoff intended this film for impressionable teenagers, the vast majority of whom are, one would assume, Christians. When asked if he thought the film would do well, Zwigoff answered, “I think it might. Every teenager in America is dying to see this film. Though they won’t be able to get in unless they have a very open-minded parent.” Clearly he was aware of the film’s subversive content.

Two years later came another Jewish-directed anti-Christmas movie. The Ice Harvest, Harold Ramis’s “grisly black comedy/film-noir,” sees Billy Bob Thornton return to a mayhem-filled Christmas. One reviewer intoned that The Ice Harvest “is a must-see for fans . . . in the mood to see one of the worst Christmas Eves in the history of cinema.” Roger Ebert was also impressed. “I liked the movie for the quirky way it pursues humor through the drifts of greed, lust, booze, betrayal and spectacularly complicated ways to die.” In other words, Hollywood’s version of Merry Christmas stuff.

The Gremlins

Perhaps the most unsettling Christmas movie was the original Gremlins (1984). Though directed by Joe Dante, Steven Spielberg’s production company, Amblin Entertainment, released it. Time magazine characterized the film as being “developed and ‘presented’” by Spielberg and being one of his “children too.”

Stylistically, too, this film is completely Spielbergian, beginning with a typical suburban paradise. Snow is on the ground as local residents prepare for Christmas.

The drama begins when protagonist Billy receives a cute “mogwai” from his inventor father, but the creature spawns siblings that are far from full of holiday cheer. On the contrary, they bring violence, mayhem, and death to this otherwise happy time of year. Their mischief is methodically paired with normally positive symbols of Christmas. For instance, when Billy’s mom is home alone making Christmas cookies and listening to Christmas music, she is attacked by a squad of ghoulish gremlins, long in tooth and with murder on their minds. After stabbing one through the heart, she dispatches another with a deft push of the blender switch, turning the previously Christmas-cookie-aroma-filled kitchen into a bloodbath. Retreating to the living room, she is literally attacked by the Christmas tree, which is full of gremlins. This conflation of joyful Christian symbols with diabolical evil is a central device to the whole movie.

Another example comes when the police pass by Billy’s neighbor’s house and are greeted by the neighbor, dressed as Santa Claus, running about helplessly as gremlins eat into his brain. Next, Christmas-caroling gremlins arrive at grouchy old Miss Deagle’s door, only to send her flying out the second-floor window of her house in a malfunctioning motorized chair.

The scenes which most firmly tie this movie to a distinct Jewish sensibility, however, come with two extraneous dialogues between Billy and his girlfriend Kate. Passing a group of Christmas carolers singing “Silent Night,” Kate suddenly and soberly states that Christmas is a time when “a lot of people get really depressed. . . . While everybody else is opening up their presents, they’re opening up their wrists. It’s true. The suicide rate is always the highest around the holidays.” When she volunteers that she doesn’t celebrate Christmas, Billy asks, “What, are you Hindu or something?” Historically, the non-Christian group in America with mixed feelings toward Christmas is not Hindus, but Jews. Here the mask is in place but the true message is easily discernible.

Much later in the movie, after the gremlins have wreaked havoc on Kingston Falls, Kate launches into a startling horror story about Christmas, one that seems completely gratuitous since it is independent of the blood-thirsty gremlin theme. Surveying the rubble left by the marauding gremlins, Kate relates how she now has another reason to hate Christmas. It seems that when she was nine, she and her mother were decorating the tree on Christmas Eve, waiting for her father to come home from the office. They waited, but he never came.

Then, four or five days later, as the temperature dropped, Kate went to make a fire. “And that’s when I noticed the smell.”  Thinking it was a dead cat or bird, they called the fire department to clean it out, but instead “they pulled out my father. He was dressed in a Santa Claus suit. He’d been climbing down the chimney on Christmas Eve, his arms loaded with presents. He was going to surprise us. He slipped and broke his neck, died instantly. And that’s how I found out there was no Santa Claus.”

“Mr. Hankey’s Christmas Classics”

Finally, we arrive at what must be the most blatantly hostile and offensive portrayal of Christmas ever found in the mainstream American media. The creators of the animated series South Park concocted a Christmas character to replace Santa. This new character is “Mr. Hankey the Christmas Poo,” an animated human feces. Mr. Hankey was introduced in a 1997 episode that showed the young Jewish boy Kyle brushing his teeth. Mr. Hankey, wearing a Santa hat, jumps out of the toilet bowl and sings a song about Santa and Christmas. The starkest comment in the scene comes when this animated feces writes “Noel” in excrement on the mirror. (This early version can be viewed here.)

No wonder Mr. Pearl, our Jewish reviewer, gleefully explained his motive for collecting anti-Christmas films in these terms: “It’s my wanting to recognize things that are deliberately anti-Christmas. It’s my wanting to take a big you know what on everyone’s Christmas spirit. . . . Each one of them is so anti-Christmas that I want to share them with the world, thereby forcing everyone to realize how liberating it is to rip off the Christmas mind control device and have some laughs in the process.” (Pearl provides embedded YouTube scenes of the anti-Christmas films he recommends).

Two years later, the more extensive Mr. Hankey version was released as Mr. Hankey’s Christmas Classics. (A parallel CD of the songs includes the delightful “Merry Fucking Christmas”). Here Mr. Hankey besmirches the faces of children singing Christmas songs. He then introduces us to the next scene, Christmastime in Hell, where Hitler is shown crying over his Christmas tree. Later, when Jesus and Santa sing a duet, Santa gets miffed that there are far more songs about Jesus than about him, so he leaves the stage. When Jesus implores him to return, Santa speaks the cheery words, “Aw, fuck you, Jesus!” (Read the script here.)

This episode is a parody of the Charlie Brown Christmas Special in which everyone yells out “Merry Christmas, Charlie Brown!” only after Charlie has realized the true meaning of Christmas—which has Christ at its center. In the  South Park version, the characters wish the Jewish boy Kyle a Merry Christmas only after he has taught everyone, through Mr. Hankey the Christmas Poo, that Christmas and Christianity are shit.

Replacing Christmas with the culture of the Holocaust

Finally, this brings us to Christmas this year. More than ever, the focus will be on Jewish themes rather than Christian. As a recent New York Times article admitted, Holocaust-themed Christmas releases have been the norm for years. Sophie’s Choice, for example, debuted in December 1982, Schindler’s List was released in the same month in 1993, and The Pianist opened two days after Christmas in 2002.

This year is no different: On Christmas Day the new Tom Cruise movie Valkyrie will debut. This film features Cruise as a German officer who plots to kill Hitler, prompting Cruise to joke in an interview, “Go kill Hitler on Christmas!” We will also have Defiance and Good, two more Nazi-oriented films, which will premier a week after Christmas. Then there is The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, “which tells the story of a forbidden friendship between the son of a Nazi officer and a Jewish boy imprisoned in a concentration camp.” And don’t miss The Reader, which features Kate Winslet being tried for her years as a concentration-camp guard. Finally, there is Adam Resurrected, starring Jeff Goldblum as a Holocaust survivor living in a mental institution. The title seems to posit the death of Jesus at Christmastime and his replacement with a Jewish resurrection.

Out with the old religion, in with the new. A friend wrote: “I’ve seen the previews for Valkyrie. Good grief! And to release it on Christmas Day — it really doesn’t get more obvious than this. Sort of like saying, ‘Don’t you realize, THIS is your new religion, not all this Jesus business!’”

Three years ago, Fox News Channel host John Gibson wrote The War on Christmas: How the Liberal Plot to Ban the Sacred Christian Holiday Is Worse Than You Thought. Well, it has gotten worse than we thought. But Gibson’s parting words are still the only formula for a reversal in this war. “Those who would ban Christmas and Christians should not mistake the signs on the horizon. The Christians are coming to retake their place in the public square, and the most natural battleground in this war is Christmas. The war on Christmas is joined.”

And may the good guys win. It’s a battle we can’t afford to lose. Merry Christmas!

Yes, there are still Christians in Israel. At least in Jerusalem.

AFP:

Israeli anti-racism activists have called for an investigation after a Jewish extremist leader urged a ban on Christmas celebrations in the country and called Christians “vampires”.

Benzi Gopstein, who heads the far-right Lehava organisation and has been arrested a number of times, made the comments in an article on the ultra-Orthodox Jewish website Kooker.

“Christmas has no place in the Holy Land,” wrote Gopstein, who lives in a Jewish settlement in Hebron in the occupied West Bank.

He spoke of the “fall of the line of defence of the Jewish people for hundreds of years against our enemies, the Catholic Church.”

“The mission of those vampires and bloodsuckers remains. If Jews cannot be killed, they can be converted,” he wrote.

“We must remove the vampires before they drink our blood once again.”

I wonder who the Israeli anti-racism activists are? Jews high on their own supply?

And isn’t interesting that in this case, Judaism is once more a race?

Editor’s note: Originally posted in 2012, this article gets at the Jewish ethnic angle behind the “War on Christmas.”

A new book, Joshua Eli Plaut’s A Kosher Christmas: ’Tis the Season to Be Jewish, documents what we have known all along: The Jews did indeed subvert Christmas.  This book deserves a full review, but Ethan Schwartz’s summary and comment (“Twas the night after Christmas“) deserve scrutiny. First the summary:

Jews have been the vanguard of an effort to “transform Christmastime into a holiday season belonging to all Americans,” without religious exclusivity.  The most important Jewish mechanisms of secularization are comedy and parody, for laughter undermines religious awe.  Take, for example, Hanukkah Harry from “Saturday Night Live”, who heroically steps in for a bedridden Santa by delivering presents from a cart pulled by donkeys named Moishe, Hershel, and Shlomo.  Remarkably, Hanukkah Harry has emerged as a real Santa-alternative for many American Jews.  Plaut sees such things not as attempts at assimilation but as an intentional subversion of Christmas traditions.  “Through these parodies,” he writes, “Jews could envision not having to be captivated by the allure of ubiquitous Christmas symbols.”  And it isn’t just Jews: for Americans in general, Jewish parody helps ensure that Christmas “not be taken too seriously” and that the celebrations of other traditions “be accorded equal respect and opportunity.”

There seem to be two messages here. One is the message of subversion utilizing ridicule among other methods. The other is that Jews are seen as high-mindedly making Christmas  “into a holiday season belonging to all Americans.” The end result is that Christmas is not “taken too seriously” and the Christian religious aspect central to the traditional holiday is de-emphasized.

People who take their religion seriously do not allow their religion to be ridiculed. One need only think of the Muslim reactions to cartoons ridiculing Mohammed. The fact that Jews have been able to ridicule Christianity without any serious negative consequences is an important marker of Jewish power and an equally strong indication of the decline of Christian religious belief. I suspect that the organized Jewish community would react in outrage if non-Jews ridiculed religious Judaism. Indeed, any criticism of Jews as Jews is off limits in the mainstream media. (A topical short list of verboten topics: the loyalties of neocon Jews and their role in promoting the war in Iraq, the Jewish aspect of the Ivy League admissions scandal, how Jewish control of Hollywood influences media content.)

Schwartz doesn’t quarrel with Plaut’s evidence, but wonders if it’s good for the Jews that such a book be written:

There is something disconcerting about this thesis, summoning up classic anti-Semitic images of conspiracy and sabotage.  Without a trace of irony, Plaut recounts incidents in which fundamentalist Christian groups complained that “certain Americans, particularly Jews, were trying to take the ‘Christ’ out of Christmas.”  He adds that “anti-Semitic comments often ensued.”  Those Christian fundamentalists might well feel vindicated by Plaut’s argument; yet Plaut is unfazed by this connection, and rightly so.  It is not inherently anti-Christian, he recognizes, to oppose Christianity’s domination of a secular democracy.  If Jews have helped to make American society more open, they should be proud of it.

So Jews subverted Christmas but their motives were pure and idealistic. But such an account ignores the Jewish role in conceptualizing America as a proposition nation—a major topic of The Culture of Critique. The Jewish stress on cultural pluralism (which has now morphed into multiculturalism) was an explicit rejection of the ethnocultural strand of American identity, an important part of which was Christianity. (Indeed, until the recent wave of immigration resulting from the 1965 law, Jews constituting 2-3 percent of the population, were the only identifiable American group that was not Christian.) Jews were central to building a wall between religion and the public square which has resulted in the “war on Christmas” that we still see raging. Jews were also central to changing U.S. immigration policy to be open to all the peoples of the world, again with an ideology that America is merely a set of abstract principles and has no ethnic or cultural core; therefore it should be open to all peoples and these peoples should be able to retain their own culture as part of the American mosaic.

I realize that many good people shy away from saying it, but the reality is that Jews have very aggressively pursued policies that benefit them and are opposed to the interests of the traditional people of America and the West. And because Jews attained status as an intellectual and media elite, they have been able to have a very large effect on public policy and even on the attitudes of non-Jews.

Plaut emphasizes the difference between the very aggressive behavior of Eastern European immigrants with their hatred of Christianity contrasted with the German Jews who arrived in the mid-19th century and “embraced the holiday.” It’s an important distinction, at least in the American context. But in any case, Plaut’s description of the motives of the Eastern European as stemming from their hatred of Christianity hardly paints them as idealistic crusaders on behalf of an open society.  It bears repeating once again that Jews react with hostility to the idea that Israel should not have a Jewish ethnocultural core while they have led the campaign against the idea that America and the West have any ethnocultural core. As with their promoting non-White, non-Christian immigration, their advocacy has nothing to do with ideals of moral universalism but everything to do with pursuing what’s good for the Jews, motivated by Jewish hatreds toward the traditional people and cultures of the West. The war on Christmas is thus a central example of the theme of Jews as a hostile elite.

This is what happens when foreigners, in this case a Korean, get power. They rage against their host nation’s cultural and religious traditions.

At PS 169 in Sunset Park, Brooklyn, Principal Eujin Jaela Kim has banned Thanksgiving, Christmas (mentioning Santa) and the Pledge of Allegiance.

Why did she do that? Aside from Kim’s not being an American, “[n]inety-five percent of the 1,600 kids at PS 169 are Asian or Hispanic,” Fox News reports.

“We definitely can’t say Christmas, nothing with Christmas on it, nothing with Santa,” PTA President Mimi Ferrer said administrators told her. “No angels. We can’t even have a star because it can represent a religious system, like the Star of David.”

We’re only in the early stages of November. Thanksgiving is approximately two-and-a-half weeks away. Yet Jewbucks has already begun waging a war on Christmas.

Jewbucks is known for releasing their “red cup” around this time of the year. Each year it’s designed with a different Christmas theme. But this year it’s just a plain red cup sans Christmas theme.

The pricey Jew-owned coffee shop has rightfully received its fair share of criticism for supporting the politically correct zeitgeist and participating in the war on Christmas.

CNBC:

The company, however, retains that their cups were meant to be a blank canvas for customers to create their own stories, inspired by the doodles and designs that customers have drawn on white cups for years.

“In the past, we have told stories with our holiday cups designs,” Jeffrey Fields, Starbucks vice president of Design & Content, said in a statement. “This year we wanted to usher in the holidays with a purity of design that welcomes all of our stories.”

When I asked Jewbucks’ Jew CEO Howard Schultz why he is now complicit in the war on Christmas, he curtly told me that it is the current year.

Is any other candidate but Trump vowing to wage war against the Jewish war against Christmas? Is this even anything that people would imagine a candidate to talk about?

All the rest are just “fetus, fetus, fetus, Jews, Jews, fetus, Jews, taxes, Jews, fetus.”

Except Magic Negro. I don’t even know what he’s talking about, besides that he doesn’t stab people anymore.

People are loving that – “like hey, this Black guy’s great – he doesn’t even stab anyone!”

Breitbart:

On Monday, Donald Trump said perhaps Americans should consider boycotting Starbucks for taking “Merry Christmas” off of their coffee cups and vowed that if he wins the presidential election, “we’re all going to be saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again.”

Speaking at a Springfield, Illinois rally, Trump said that he is “speaking against myself” because “I have one of the most successful Starbucks in Trump Tower.”

He said he read about Starbucks’s plain red cups earlier in the day.

“Starbucks is taking Merry Christmas off. No more Merry Christmas on Starbucks. No More. I wouldn’t buy,” Trump said. “Maybe we should boycott Starbucks. I don’t know. Seriously, I don’t care. That’s the end of that lease, but who cares.”

He then vowed that Americans will be saying “Merry Christmas” again if Trump becomes President.

“I will tell you — lots of big things, lots of little things, you can call this anything you want, but if I become President, we’re all going to be saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again,” Trump said. “That I can tell you.”

Another one of those “for this single reason alone” moments here, people. They’re stacking upon each other.

Starbucks is Jew.

Jewish parasites at Salon have come out claiming, explicitly, that Starbucks Jews don’t hate Jesus.

We are left wondering: if the Jews don’t hate Jesus, why did they crucify him?

It takes hatred to frame an innocent man for some gibberish that didn’t even make sense and convince an occupying foreign power to torture him to death under threat of financial manipulations. At least I would assume so.

The war on Christmas is not unimportant. It is a deeply symbolic instance of the Jewish war on White culture and society. Christmas has always been our most sacred holiday. Even before the Christian era, this was true. It is blatant and plain that they are trying to purposefully destroy this tradition, for no other conceivable reason than that they hate everything by which Whites have traditionally defined their identity.

[See Also: War on Christmas Comes to Early to Salon-But They Hate Christians All Year by James Fulford]

No religious stamps for Christmas this year.

Don’t expect new Christmas stamps this year because for the first time in decades the U.S. Postal Service won’t issue a new stamp depicting any Christian religious figure or symbol. No baby Jesus. No Mary. And none of the three wise men.

[Is the Postal Service Declaring War on Religion? by Richard Pollack, Daily Caller, September 10, 2015]

This isn’t the first time it has happened, though it is rare. And it is increasing.

In 45 of the last 50 years, the postal service has printed new images for each Christmas season, including Mary, angels, wise men, Nativity scenes, the Star of David and even Santa Claus. But this year, all of them have been banished from the production presses.

As the article notes, it’s not just all Christian holidays that have been banished, but all religious holidays. But you’ll still have “geometric snowflakes.”

One of the most trite ways of describing diversity is to call it “vibrant.” The very word is now a synonym for crime and urban blight among many conservatives, through the Main Stream Media still hasn’t caught on to the ironic joke.

But the real effect of diversity is to leave trite consumerism as the only “culture” left standing. At first, you try to incorporate different religious traditions into the larger community. That falls apart when people start using Flying Spaghetti Monster and Satanic Temple style trolling operations to force religion entirely out of the public sphere. So eventually, so as not to deal with it, you don’t have anything.

A real culture requires a common mythos that has deep meaning to everyone in the community, even those who don’t share the specific religious beliefs. The Pilgrim Fathers didn’t like Catholics very much, but it would be absurd for some Italian-American to get offended over a celebration of the Mayflower. Yet we are supposed to be deeply concerned about those who are offended by an acknowledgment of the religious importance of Christmas.

Such is life in a multicultural democracy. Have a vibrant winter festival everyone.

Earlier this week, in Part One of this column about the War on Christmas, I wrote that “the Jewish dominance of Hollywood is so obvious and undeniable that Los Angeles Times’ columnist Joel Stein recently made it official. What else can you say when all eight major film studios are run by Jews.” I’ve written on this theme extensively in The Occidental Quarterly (here, here, and TOQ Spring 2008). Or you could read Jewtopia: The Chosen Book for the Chosen People, based on the surprise hit play by Bryan Fogel and Sam Wolfson. Or you could listen to  David Mamet: “For those who have not been paying attention, this group [Ashkenazi Jews] constitutes, and has constituted since its earliest days, the bulk of America’s movie directors and studio heads.”

In The Culture-Wise Family: Upholding Christian Values in a Mass Media World, Theodore Baehr and Pat Boone argued that “whoever controls the media controls the culture.” And a lynchpin of that media is Hollywood and its associated TV studios and networks.

Why does it matter that Jews control Hollywood? In essence, it matters because it represents the loss of power of one group—majority white Christians—to a group with a long history of hostility toward the people and culture of the West. Jewish control of Hollywood has been a crucial means for dispossessing majority whites from their place in the country they built. As some have argued, the twentieth century was “a Jewish century,” and much of this was because Jews controlled the image factory known as Hollywood.

Again, what Kevin MacDonald demonstrates in The Culture of Critique, cannot be repeated too often: “The Judaization of the West means that the peoples who created the culture and traditions of the West have been made to feel deeply ashamed of their own history — surely the prelude to their demise as a culture and as a people.” And, as I argued earlier, the treatment of Christmas shows how Jews “have been able to translate this hatred of Christ and his birthday into increasingly scandalous imagery, thanks to their domination of Hollywood and TV studios.”

Today I’ll talk about how that has affected the kind of Hollywood films we get with respect to Christmas. In essence, it means that in the last forty or so years, the Christian aspect of the holiday has vanished on screen. The best we can hope for is a positive, feel-good portrayal of the season, such as we had in Tim Allen’s The Santa Clause (1994) or Tom Hanks’ The Polar Express ten years later.

Too often, however, films have associated the Christmas season with negative or even horrific stories. Perhaps the best example of this is Silent Night, Deadly Night. This is a 1984 slasher film that begins with a young boy named Billy  witnessing the murder of his parents by a man dressed as Santa Claus. Billy ends up at St. Mary’s Orphanage, where he is beaten by Mother Superior. Later, morphing memories of his punishment at her hands with images of Santa, Billy grows up to become a killer teenage Santa. At work, for example, he strangles a co-worker with Christmas lights and then dispatches the girl with whom the co-worker was having sex.

After a string of other Santa murders, Billy returns to the orphanage, with the police hot in pursuit. Tragically, they shoot and kill Father O’Brien, a deaf priest dressed as Santa. Sneaking into the orphanage, Billy, dressed as Santa, swings his ax at Mother Superior, but a policeman shoots him down. Imparting his central message, Billy assures viewers, “You’re safe now… Santa Claus… is gone.” Not exactly a happy message at Christmastime.

In 1984, such imagery was still able to rile the population. Siskel and Ebert condemned the film, going “so far as to read the film’s production credits on air, saying ‘shame, shame’ after each one.” Angry mothers protested the movie around the nation, and TriStars Pictures, its distributor, quickly ceased advertising the film.

Silent Night, Deadly Night did have antecedents. Black Christmas was a 1974 movie set in a sorority house during Christmas break. A maniac is making calls from within the house, killing the coeds one by one. The movie also takes every opportunity to pair beloved Christmas songs with chilling scenes, a phenomenon that was later repeated in Gremlins, as we will see. Another, Christmas Evil (1980), features a delusional Santa stand-in who murders three church-goers in front of a church. (He stabbed one man in the eye with a toy.) Later, while wearing a ragged Santa outfit and being chased by an angry mob, our main character drives his van off a bridge, imagining himself to be Santa in his flying sleigh.

As Austin Pearl, a Jewish reviewer, approvingly wrote, “Christmas Evil ruins Christmas unlike any other movie.” In particular, this reviewer liked “all the vividly disturbing images of Santa sprinkled throughout the movie.”

It’s no surprise that Pearl also liked the 2003 Billy Bob Thorton film Bad Santa, which was a concerted ethnic effort to trash Christmas. Jewish director Terry Zwigoff made the film under producers Ethan and Joel Coen for the Disney subsidiary Miramax, run by two more Jewish brothers, Bob and Harvey Weinstein. Billy Bob Thornton stars as the bad Santa of the title, going about his life boozing and swearing with abandon. At one point he has anal sex with an overweight woman in a changing room, while elsewhere he goes to a mall drunk and destroys a reindeer display in a drunken rage. Ho ho ho.

Near the end of this dark film, he is shot by a group of policemen but survives. Despite his obvious guilt in numerous crimes, he is pardoned because “the Phoenix police department shooting an unarmed Santa Claus in front of children was more fucked up than Rodney King.”

According to Wikipedia, critics described it as an “evil twin” of Miracle on 34th Street, the inspirational Christmas classic.  No wonder Austin Pearl wrote glowingly that “Bad Santa is perhaps the most subversive, offensive Christmas movie ever made—with Thornton as a truly despicable character who, for once, does not receive a total personality transplant by the movie’s end.”

Director Zwigoff intended this film for impressionable teenagers, the vast majority of whom are, one would assume, Christians. When asked if he thought the film would do well, Zwigoff answered, “I think it might. Every teenager in America is dying to see this film. Though they won’t be able to get in unless they have a very open-minded parent.” Clearly he was aware of the film’s subversive content.

Two years later came another Jewish-directed anti-Christmas movie. The Ice Harvest, Harold Ramis’s “grisly black comedy/film-noir,” sees Billy Bob Thornton return to a mayhem-filled Christmas. One reviewer intoned that The Ice Harvest “is a must-see for fans . . . in the mood to see one of the worst Christmas Eves in the history of cinema.” Roger Ebert was also impressed. “I liked the movie for the quirky way it pursues humor through the drifts of greed, lust, booze, betrayal and spectacularly complicated ways to die.” In other words, Hollywood’s version of Merry Christmas stuff.

The Gremlins

Perhaps the most unsettling Christmas movie was the original Gremlins (1984). Though directed by Joe Dante, Steven Spielberg’s production company, Amblin Entertainment, released it. Time magazine characterized the film as being “developed and ‘presented’” by Spielberg and being one of his “children too.”

Stylistically, too, this film is completely Spielbergian, beginning with a typical suburban paradise. Snow is on the ground as local residents prepare for Christmas.

The drama begins when protagonist Billy receives a cute “mogwai” from his inventor father, but the creature spawns siblings that are far from full of holiday cheer. On the contrary, they bring violence, mayhem, and death to this otherwise happy time of year. Their mischief is methodically paired with normally positive symbols of Christmas. For instance, when Billy’s mom is home alone making Christmas cookies and listening to Christmas music, she is attacked by a squad of ghoulish gremlins, long in tooth and with murder on their minds. After stabbing one through the heart, she dispatches another with a deft push of the blender switch, turning the previously Christmas-cookie-aroma-filled kitchen into a bloodbath. Retreating to the living room, she is literally attacked by the Christmas tree, which is full of gremlins. This conflation of joyful Christian symbols with diabolical evil is a central device to the whole movie.

Another example comes when the police pass by Billy’s neighbor’s house and are greeted by the neighbor, dressed as Santa Claus, running about helplessly as gremlins eat into his brain. Next, Christmas-caroling gremlins arrive at grouchy old Miss Deagle’s door, only to send her flying out the second-floor window of her house in a malfunctioning motorized chair.

The scenes which most firmly tie this movie to a distinct Jewish sensibility, however, come with two extraneous dialogues between Billy and his girlfriend Kate. Passing a group of Christmas carolers singing “Silent Night,” Kate suddenly and soberly states that Christmas is a time when “a lot of people get really depressed. . . . While everybody else is opening up their presents, they’re opening up their wrists. It’s true. The suicide rate is always the highest around the holidays.” When she volunteers that she doesn’t celebrate Christmas, Billy asks, “What, are you Hindu or something?” Historically, the non-Christian group in America with mixed feelings toward Christmas is not Hindus, but Jews. Here the mask is in place but the true message is easily discernible.

Much later in the movie, after the gremlins have wreaked havoc on Kingston Falls, Kate launches into a startling horror story about Christmas, one that seems completely gratuitous since it is independent of the blood-thirsty gremlin theme. Surveying the rubble left by the marauding gremlins, Kate relates how she now has another reason to hate Christmas. It seems that when she was nine, she and her mother were decorating the tree on Christmas Eve, waiting for her father to come home from the office. They waited, but he never came.

Then, four or five days later, as the temperature dropped, Kate went to make a fire. “And that’s when I noticed the smell.”  Thinking it was a dead cat or bird, they called the fire department to clean it out, but instead “they pulled out my father. He was dressed in a Santa Claus suit. He’d been climbing down the chimney on Christmas Eve, his arms loaded with presents. He was going to surprise us. He slipped and broke his neck, died instantly. And that’s how I found out there was no Santa Claus.”

“Mr. Hankey’s Christmas Classics”

Finally, we arrive at what must be the most blatantly hostile and offensive portrayal of Christmas ever found in the mainstream American media. The creators of the animated series South Park concocted a Christmas character to replace Santa. This new character is “Mr. Hankey the Christmas Poo,” an animated human feces. Mr. Hankey was introduced in a 1997 episode that showed the young Jewish boy Kyle brushing his teeth. Mr. Hankey, wearing a Santa hat, jumps out of the toilet bowl and sings a song about Santa and Christmas. The starkest comment in the scene comes when this animated feces writes “Noel” in excrement on the mirror. (This early version can be viewed here.)

No wonder Mr. Pearl, our Jewish reviewer, gleefully explained his motive for collecting anti-Christmas films in these terms: “It’s my wanting to recognize things that are deliberately anti-Christmas. It’s my wanting to take a big you know what on everyone’s Christmas spirit. . . . Each one of them is so anti-Christmas that I want to share them with the world, thereby forcing everyone to realize how liberating it is to rip off the Christmas mind control device and have some laughs in the process.” (Pearl provides embedded YouTube scenes of the anti-Christmas films he recommends).

Two years later, the more extensive Mr. Hankey version was released as Mr. Hankey’s Christmas Classics. (A parallel CD of the songs includes the delightful “Merry Fucking Christmas”). Here Mr. Hankey besmirches the faces of children singing Christmas songs. He then introduces us to the next scene, Christmastime in Hell, where Hitler is shown crying over his Christmas tree. Later, when Jesus and Santa sing a duet, Santa gets miffed that there are far more songs about Jesus than about him, so he leaves the stage. When Jesus implores him to return, Santa speaks the cheery words, “Aw, fuck you, Jesus!” (Read the script here.)

This episode is a parody of the Charlie Brown Christmas Special in which everyone yells out “Merry Christmas, Charlie Brown!” only after Charlie has realized the true meaning of Christmas—which has Christ at its center. In the  South Park version, the characters wish the Jewish boy Kyle a Merry Christmas only after he has taught everyone, through Mr. Hankey the Christmas Poo, that Christmas and Christianity are shit.

Replacing Christmas with the culture of the Holocaust

Finally, this brings us to Christmas this year. More than ever, the focus will be on Jewish themes rather than Christian. As a recent New York Times article admitted, Holocaust-themed Christmas releases have been the norm for years. Sophie’s Choice, for example, debuted in December 1982, Schindler’s List was released in the same month in 1993, and The Pianist opened two days after Christmas in 2002.

This year is no different: On Christmas Day the new Tom Cruise movie Valkyrie will debut. This film features Cruise as a German officer who plots to kill Hitler, prompting Cruise to joke in an interview, “Go kill Hitler on Christmas!” We will also have Defiance and Good, two more Nazi-oriented films, which will premier a week after Christmas. Then there is The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, “which tells the story of a forbidden friendship between the son of a Nazi officer and a Jewish boy imprisoned in a concentration camp.” And don’t miss The Reader, which features Kate Winslet being tried for her years as a concentration-camp guard. Finally, there is Adam Resurrected, starring Jeff Goldblum as a Holocaust survivor living in a mental institution. The title seems to posit the death of Jesus at Christmastime and his replacement with a Jewish resurrection.

Out with the old religion, in with the new. A friend wrote: “I’ve seen the previews for Valkyrie. Good grief! And to release it on Christmas Day — it really doesn’t get more obvious than this. Sort of like saying, ‘Don’t you realize, THIS is your new religion, not all this Jesus business!’”

Three years ago, Fox News Channel host John Gibson wrote The War on Christmas: How the Liberal Plot to Ban the Sacred Christian Holiday Is Worse Than You Thought. Well, it has gotten worse than we thought. But Gibson’s parting words are still the only formula for a reversal in this war. “Those who would ban Christmas and Christians should not mistake the signs on the horizon. The Christians are coming to retake their place in the public square, and the most natural battleground in this war is Christmas. The war on Christmas is joined.”

And may the good guys win. It’s a battle we can’t afford to lose. Merry Christmas!

To promote their sick “religion,” the Satanic Temple of Detroit has erected a “Snaketivity Scene” at the Michigan Capitol. It features a snake wrapped around the Satanic cross with a book titled “Revolt of the Angels.”

After catching wind of the Satanic Temple’s plans, state Senator Rick Jones decided to erect a Nativity scene at the Capitol two days before the “Snaketivity Scene” was erected. He rightly alluded that his display represents the light and the silly “Snaketivity Scene” represents the darkness.

Fox News:

In a videotaped interview with the Lansing State Journal, Satanic Temple spokeswoman Jex Blackmore said her group doesn’t worship Satan but does promote individuality, compassion and views that differ from Christian and conservative beliefs.

Blackmore said that the “holiday season is a time of year that is celebrated in many different ways.”

“Having our government endorse one singular viewpoint or method of celebrating the season is problematic when we have a diverse community of people in Michigan,” she said.

The Daily Stormer’s own Marcus Cicero once elucidated my exact sentiments of the decadent “religion” of Satanism:

The overwhelming majority of what can be called “Satanism,” consists of a poisonous mixture of Marxism and sexual perversion designed to corrupt the values produced from well over a thousand years of Christian Civilization. The most well-known of these groups, The Church of Satan, was created during the late 1960’s by the subversive Jew Anton Lavey, incorporating numerous Freudian concepts that range into the realm of the truly bizarre.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.