Archive for the ‘GloboHomoBezos Ministry of Propaganda’ Category

The InfoWars saga (and Daily Stormer before it) are meant to be object lessons to discourage the others. The swarm-like nature of the operation by leftoids, against a readily identifiable and personalized crimethinker, betrays its real purpose: to silence an entire segment of the population.

Active censorship is just the tip of the speech-chilling iceberg. Like I wrote, leftoids are playing with a super-weapon which in their hubris think they can control without blowback. They will overreach, as they’re doing now, and the weapon will turn on its wielder.

There is only one way this super-weapon remains in the control of one faction for a sufficient length of time to generationally entrench its power: by ratcheting up the lethality and area of effect of its payload. Mass censorship requires increasingly totalitarian suppressions to prevent its use from provoking an even more righteous counter-attack.

Mass murderers like Stalin knew this. And here we go again.

Read Full Post »

Ah, not a day goes by without the treat of (((shitlibs))) trying to gull the un-woke with broken logic that sounds real purty on the surface. The latest is the uncle of that basest of jews, Stephen Miller, throwing his nephew under the bus to feed his tikkun olam-sized ego.

If my nephew’s ideas on immigration had been in force a century ago, our family would have been wiped out.

By DAVID S. GLOSSER August 13, 2018

Let me tell you a story about Stephen Miller and chain migration.

It begins at the turn of the 20th century, in a dirt-floor shack in the village of Antopol, a shtetl of subsistence farmers in what is now Belarus. Beset by violent anti-Jewish pogroms and forced childhood conscription in the Czar’s army, the patriarch of the shack, Wolf-Leib Glosser, fled a village where his forebears had lived for centuries and took his chances in America.

He set foot on Ellis Island on January 7, 1903, with $8 to his name. …

What does this classically American tale have to do with Stephen Miller? Well, Izzy Glosser is his maternal grandfather, and Stephen’s mother, Miriam, is my sister.

Boom, drop the ( )ike!

I have watched with dismay and increasing horror as my nephew, an educated man who is well aware of his heritage, has become the architect of immigration policies that repudiate the very foundation of our family’s life in this country.

Because America had past immigration, it must have endless future immigration. Unassailable logic!

Reality: any nation, including America, has the right and moral justification to turn on or off at any time the immigration spigot as accords the national interest. David Glosser’s self-serving indignation is not Americans’ moral crisis.

Or: get over it, glosser.

ps Ellis Island is just one of many “classically American tales”. You know what else is a classically American tale? The 1924 Immigration and Naturalization Act that severely curtailed immigration and restricted it to European Whites, leading to the greatest explosion in a country’s standard of living ever seen in history.

I shudder at the thought of what would have become of the Glossers had the same policies Stephen so coolly espouses— the travel ban, the radical decrease in refugees, the separation of children from their parents, and even talk of limiting citizenship for legal immigrants — been in effect when Wolf-Leib made his desperate bid for freedom.

American citizens are making a desperate bid for a livable country that isn’t overrun by foreign scabs and ingrates.

The Glossers came to the U.S. just a few years before the fear and prejudice of the “America first” nativists of the day closed U.S. borders to Jewish refugees.

Just missed!

Ya know, there’s another logical conclusion one could reach from Glosser’s glossing of mass immigration: Americans shouldn’t have let in all those bubbes.

Whatta pain in the tuckus they’ve been!

Is anyone else getting tired of maudlin shysters weeping schlockodile tears for the fate of a nation they are determined to destroy under a flood of culturally and genetically foreign migrants?


From commenter Another Dad,

As much as it makes the steam rise, i love seeing the likes of Glosser put this in print.

The whole “nation of immigrants” thing is objectively stupid. Mathematically, immigration forever means that the future America must assymptotically approach the shittiness of the shittiest nation on the planet–until literally no one else on earth wants to come here! Your line–your genetic contribution to the future–will either be extinguished or your descendants scrape by in an overpopulated dystopian hell hole.

It’s the anti-thesis of patriotism or love of nation. It’s wishing the nation’s destruction and extintion.

Now i realize i’m a few SD’s to the right of the average person in mathematical “sense”, so what’s obvious to me doesn’t immediately pop for everyone. But the more these bastards keep broadcasting their idea that immigration *must never stop* the more the average person will wake up and smell the insanity and the hate.

Mass Shitholiness (multiple entendres intended) is no way to make America great again.

And malevolent ingrates are no one anybody should take seriously.


Another sharp comment from Another Dad,

First off there is no reason to take any immigrants. What happened in the Americas was “conquest”. The US certainly didn’t really require any immigrants after the founding, but they–like my immigrant ancestors–juiced the conquest a bit. Certainly immigrants were redundant by the closure of the frontier say 1880.

But if you decide “hey, i’ll add a few folks to the team”, what would be the first requirement? Loyalty. They’ll mentally and emotionally join up, become part of your nation and put the interests of their new fellow citizens first.

Some people naturally take to that. Some people, some peoples, just massively fail that basic test.

I’m noticing that Maul-Right acolytes are becoming quite adept at not only challenging the Left’s framing, but reframing the debates altogether to utterly neuter and shut out the Left’s typical litany of feelgood debate points. Another Dad reimagines the frame perfectly when he denies the very premise of taking in *any* number of immigrants at any time.

Our rhetorical weaponry is getting more lethal.

Read Full Post »

It’s chilling ‘cuz it’s true.

From the VDare feed:

Free speech has no greater enemy than the so-called #FreePress.

The government isn’t going to deplatform you, try to get you fired, and cheer on assaults against you.

Journalists will.

I’m calling it the REEE Press. The press REEEs indignantly, then hunts down the crimethinker and casts him to the icy wastelands.

Short-term solution: Make whorenalists the story.

The “free press” in alliance with their left-wing technodweeb symbiotes are deplatforming dissident voices faster than you can count, and are justifying the Stalinist Silencing by claiming that the victims of their inquisition are “inciting violence“.

Media: *incites violence against whites, cops, trump, republican congressmen, alt-righters*


Media: “Alex Jones incites violence!”

That biting quip comes to mind.

Leftoid: “my violence is speech, your speech is violence”

PS Brad Parscale, President Trump’s Viking warrior-slash-tech guru, says “Big Tech is becoming Big Brother“.

Big Tech has a big bias problem.

Social media platforms that once facilitated the free exchange of ideas and information are now actively seeking to silence and censor conservative opinions.

This new Orwellian impulse that is taking over Big Tech is particularly problematic because social media websites, which are supposed to be safe spaces for all free speech, get special legal perks.

Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, websites such as Facebook and Twitter are not treated as publishers of “information provided by another” — which would subject them to libel laws and other headaches publishers have to deal with — because they “offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse.”

This means social media platforms are not merely private companies who can censor whomever they wish — They are considered, by law, to be public forums that allow free and open debate.

Yet, they’re doing the exact opposite. They are stifling online speech, warping the national discourse, and obstructing the free flow of ideas. Big Tech is not just biased against conservatives — it is actively trying to silence them and deprive them of online platforms.

Big Tech’s bias was on full display recently when conservative activist Candace Owens was suspended from Twitter for satirical tweets mimicking the racist, anti-white tweets of New York Times editorial board member Sarah Jeong — who has never been suspended from Twitter despite a history of racist comments.

Parscale used the term “anti-White”.

Which means Trump has heard the term “anti-White”.

Which means it will appear in a Trump tweet very soon.

Which means the Left’s whole facade will come crashing down and their salty tears will flood the zone.

Twitter isn’t the only major social media site with a demonstrated history of bias against conservatives. Facebook is infamous for its lopsided application of its “community standards.” Conservative content is regularly removed from the site while vile, often violent, radical left-wing content is left alone. Recently, a GOP congressional candidate’s ad was banned because it depicted images of the Cambodian genocide.

To make matters worse, the social media giant recently changed its feed algorithms — ostensibly to combat fake news — but the result has been a suspicious and significant drop in the reach of conservative pages and advertisements. A study found that while liberal publishers saw a roughly 2 percent increase in web traffic from Facebook following the algorithm changes, conservative ones saw a loss of traffic averaging around 14 percent.

Big Tech’s anti-conservative bias is positively institutional. Facebook, Google (YouTube), and Twitter all work with the Southern Poverty Law Center, a far-left organization with a proven track record of anti-conservative bias, to decide what is and isn’t “hate speech.”

Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like Big Tech is set to return to its free speech roots anytime soon. The Left clearly no longer values free speech at all. […]

What we are seeing in Big Tech is the inherent totalitarian impulse of the Left come into full focus. The Left is losing at the ballot box, and there are some signs it is starting to lose the culture war too. The free and open Internet has been indispensable in spreading conservative ideas, and it was indispensable in getting Donald Trump elected president — and now the Left wishes to destroy it.

Hot DAMN Parscale dropped the hammer on the Leftoid speech police.

This is great news. Parscale has Trump’s ear; if Trump is getting daily updates about the coordinated censorship campaign of social media companies to silence right-wing populists and race realtalkers, then it’s a good bet that as soon as the battlefield clears a little for Trump to really flex his political and people capital, he will crush these anti-American technopolies and media propagandists with the MAGA Mjölnir.

Pray for Trump and the warriors in his inner circle. Our enemies are cornered and roused to sputtering rage and are liable to lash out and do something extremely unwise.

Read Full Post »

“We’re evil, and we have your coordinates.”


It’s as bad as it looks, and worse. Orwell’s only mistake in 1984 was underestimating the depth and breadth with which his dystopian vision would become reality.

Read Full Post »

Clown World keeps delivering.

American Couple Believing ‘Evil Is A Make-Believe Concept’ Bike Through Territory Near Afghan Border. ISIS Stabs Them To Death.

A young American couple who took a year-long bike trip around the world, believing that evil was a make-believe concept, took a fatal route in Tajikistan near the Afghan border, where alleged ISIS terrorists stabbed them to death.

Jay Austin and Lauren Geoghegan, 29, quit their jobs last year in order to make their trip. Austin was a vegan who worked for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; Geoghegan, a vegetarian who worked in the Georgetown University admissions office.

Can shitlib self-parody implode into an astronomical singularity?

While in Morocco, Austin wrote:

You watch the news and you read the papers and you’re led to believe that the world is a big, scary place. People, the narrative goes, are not to be trusted. People are bad. People are evil. People are axe murderers and monsters and worse.

I don’t buy it. Evil is a make-believe concept we’ve invented to deal with the complexities of fellow humans holding values and beliefs and perspectives different than our own—it’s easier to dismiss an opinion as abhorrent than strive to understand it. Badness exists, sure, but even that’s quite rare. By and large, humans are kind. Self-interested sometimes, myopic sometimes, but kind. Generous and wonderful and kind. No greater revelation has come from our journey than this.

Inner Hajnal shitlib Whites have a problem reconciling the existence of evil in the world because the fact is that, at least by Western White society standards, evil disproportionately exists in nonWhite and nonWestern societies. So instead of accepting the premise of banal, routine nonWhite evil, shitlibs prefer to deny the existence of evil altogether. Or play games of sophistry and redefine evil as “badness” (as if differences of degree and kind don’t matter).

White shitlibs also have a problem with the logical concept of mutual inclusion. Goodness, kindness, and generosity of spirit can exist alongside evil. The existence of the former does not refute the existence of the latter.

And reader PA had a thing or two to say about how nonWhite hosts can be quite gracious to guests they know will be leaving their land soon, and that this graciousness misleads gullibly naive shitlib Whites to believe the rest of the world is as nice as they are (except to BadWhites).

It’s all so grating, the mix of condescension, sanctimony, paternalism, and callowness of the typical modren shitlib. “People, the narrative goes, are not to be trusted” What narrative? The one your people control? And, sorry to tell ya (which you know now in your travels through the illimitable void), some groups of people really are less trustworthy than other groups of people. “we’ve invented” Who’s “we”, kemosoyboy? “to deal with the complexities of fellow humans” Describe those complexities. You mean like, stabbing foreign travelers to death at the side of the road? “it’s easier to dismiss an opinion as abhorrent” Yes, everyone the shitlib disagrees with is an ignoramus. “than strive to understand it.” The shitlib is so understanding, you should listen to him.

Austin also had some contemptuous words for President Trump:

Apparently Jay Austin thought there was evil in the world, in the form of President Trump.

Then, on July 29, 2018, as they were riding their bikes with two other cyclists in Tajikistan, five men exited their car and stabbed all the bicyclists to death.

grainy cellphone clip recorded by a driver shows what happened next: The men’s Daewoo sedan passes the cyclists and then makes a sharp U-turn. It doubles back, and aims directly for the bikers, ramming into them and lurching over their fallen forms. In all, four people were killed: Mr. Austin, Ms. Geoghegan and cyclists from Switzerland and the Netherlands. Two days later, the Islamic State released a video showing five men it identified as the attackers, sitting before the ISIS flag. They face the camera and make a vow: to kill “disbelievers.”

I don’t believe these two cotton-headed dopey universalists deserved it…but they didn’t not deserve it. I hate their killers — evil personified — but I also hate the ideology of powerlessness and wishful thinking that enabled their victimization and the victimization of anyone who may be beguiled by their, yes, evil race-blind kumbaya beliefs.

The story screams out for a physiognomy reveal:

Crikey, the manjaw on that bish. If you shaved his beard and covered the top half of their faces, would you be able to tell who was the man and who was the woman? Who knew vegetarianism could grow such a mandible?

PS This timeline is unbeatable.

Mayor to female commissioner: You make a living off anal bleaching. It’s a PoundMeToo moment, she says

A Gabber quips, “I’ve noticed there is no denial of butthole bleaching.”

PPS More timelineliness:

SHOCK: The Catholic Church has a Big Homo Problem Again

Read Full Post »

During moments of pop media regurgitation, I have had White girlfriends say to me, a White man they were happily fucking and to whom they professed their love, that, in so many words, “White men are the problem with society”.

Try to wrap your head around that lawgic trap.


Atavator comments,

Heartiste, remember Larry Auster’s “3 person morality play” in liberalism? Good White, Bad White, Other. Just about every movie people watch follows this script. Shitlibs say this kind of crap so easily because they simply assume that YOU assume they’re putting you in the “good white/redeemer” category. And when they say “white men” are the problem, they mean someone… out there.

It’s a disgusting filthy lie of a worldview, but few women have the ability to think their way out of that programming, and would probably express surprise that you would even take offense.

A big part of what we all need to be doing is making people PAY in some way (even if it begins with disgust and anger) for parroting this loathsome garbage.

Perceptive. (RIP Auster) This is the mentality at work here. When women find out I’m very much the badwhite of their nightmares (defying their expectation of the form and style a badwhite should take)….well, they get a little hotter in the panty blotter!…even if long-term they must know it’s not gonna happen between us.

It’s evidence of a profound sickness in our culture when you really digest what’s happening here:

SWPL White girls are trying to connect with White men by slandering White men. In the twisted landscape of their damebrain, these chicks think that bashing BadWhites to a White man is romantic, an example of “shared values” that White girls need to feel with a man before they’re ready to receive his swarth-free seed.

That White chicks don’t even contemplate the possibility a White man will ever object is an extremely damning indictment of the SWPL White men who share their social strata: the girls are probably right; vanishingly few craven soyboys will ever call them out for their insipid anti-White posturing.

Until they meet a stone cold shivver like yours truly. A subversive who swims among them. A rebel right under their noses.

Batrachian writes,

Women relate to things on an inchoate, emotional basis. They don’t understand themselves, or what the fundamental drivers of their behaviours often are.

The same women that feel deeply offended by the very proposition of societal eugenics and hierarchy are also the first to be socially-Darwinian in their attitudes toward men.

CH Maxim #77: The fealty to equalism women signal is belied by the ferocity with which they sift and sort men in the sexual market.

Evolution likely saw to it that women would not be aware of their subconscious motivations, lest the fair sex lose the ability to dupe beta males (self-duping authenticates other-duping).

Complementarily, evolution saw to it that men would appease the Sexual Darwinism of women by avoiding any show of weakness or expression of emotional vulnerability…or die incel. Over the eons, men have been selected to indeed be less emotionally vulnerable because instinct usually trumps affectation.

Autarky writes,

[Women’s] biological programming is to avoid social exclusion. Only when white men are seen to be more powerful than the media will ‘their opinion’ change.

My quick rebukes may not have changed their opinions but it did shut their pieholes. For a spell. (My reply to anti-White virtue sniveling women is along the lines of “you have me confused with someone who will listen to your crap”. Or mouthlove.)

Batrachian again,

I’ve often wondered about the lack of self-awareness involved in this [White women signaling anti-White bona fides].

It’s understandable that they’re primarily acting out of fear (the west has become utterly isolating and tyrannical in a way that few are able to articulate) but I doubt anyone openly acknowledges this.

Is fear driving the epidemic of White women to posture against White men? Yes, if you believe that White women believe social ostracism is guaranteed if they don’t parrot the Anti-White Party Line. Something else is driving it, too.


SWPL, overeducated, over-employed, under-childed White women, for reasons I’ve explained at length in the pages of this blog, have become disgusted with their White men, the soyboys and bugmen and effete toadies and “Concorde-nosed moguls” who are their sexual market confederates. No man is standing up to them; worse, these low T lackeys are cheering on their race-traitor White women to ever greater depths of Hajnalian subversion of their shared homeland and culture. On a primal level, one has to wonder if shitlib White women are lashing out at their own weak men through the barbed tips of anti-White agitprop.

And why these same chicks flee to tumblrrhea to tell of how they relievedly surrendered to a proudly White MAGAman and were beginning to question everything they thought they knew about themselves.

Read Full Post »

An astute comment from Wrecked ‘Em about how Twatter can maintain plausible deniability while aggressively silencing right-wing dissident voices on its monopolistic platform:

I would bet both of my gloriously large balls that Twitter is leveraging a basic psychometric difference between liberals and conservatives to achieve widespread shadowbanning of conservatives while maintaining plausible deniability. Brilliant, yet pure evil. Here’s how it works: It’s long been known that liberals are far, far more likely to block and unfriend people (even close family) over politics than are conservatives.  What does Twitter do?  Writes an algorithm that squelches people who are blocked by lots of other people.  Twitter: “It’s not us, it’s the al-go-rithm.”  Also Twitter: “Shitlibs, do yo thing!”

One way to fight back would be to block the snot out of prominent liberals, especially ones without a blue check.  This would force Twitter to manually un-ban them and it’s the manual intervention that’s going to get them in trouble eventually since any record of it will clearly show favoritism towards the left.  One suspects that this is why Twitter hands out blue checks to Leftists like candy while being notoriously stingy to conservatives – a blue check is just supposed to mean that you’re “verified”, that you are who you say you are – but it probably also means that the shadowban algorithm (((passes over you))).

Basically, Big Twatter diversity teams have written algorithms which exploit the intolerance of thin-skinned shitlibs, to effectively mass ban and silence anyone on its platform who expresses opinions that are at odds with the Leftoid Equalism Globohomo orthodoxy. Twatter and other tech giants with monopolies on the means of communication rely on the compulsion of shitlibs to swarm complaint boxes and tattle to the high priests about the heretics in their midst, fouling the mood of their safe spaces. (The Butthurt Brigade is really not taking well to the avalanche of realtalk.)

Clever, but we’re onto them. And I believe this infantile compulsion of shitlibs can be used against them, by turning them on each other until their precious anti-White signaling playgrounds like Twatter become unusable from all the screeching, tattling, banning, and doxing.

broke: the internet will mean the free flow of ideas!
woke: the internet has unleashed hate, it must be censored
bespoke: the internet will mean the free flow of pre-approved ideas!

The end game is nationalization of Big Tech and anti-trust breakups of Big Media. (Typical libertardian reply: “build your own media conglomerate”.)

Meanwhile, there are already rumblings of resistance to Big Tech’s stranglehold on the information gateways (a reader calls this reality “Corporate Stalinism”). Blueprints exist for how to destroy Twatter, Faceborg, Apple, Goolag, and Spotify (low T-FAGS). A CA judge has ruled that Twatter can be sued for falsely advertising free speech.

This is only going to get a lot worse for Soylicon Valley before it gets better, if ever. And no amount of disingenuous appeals to “stopping hate speech” will push the Trump-sized genie back in the bottle. The real resistance is begun.

PS Even payment processors are getting in the censorship act and banning political dissidents from use of their services. How much more of this Left-Wing Orwellian Corporatocracy bullshit will we tolerate? The “free market” is failing half of America. Bezos et al are banking on cheaply made chinese manufactured gadgets you can order from the comfort of your fapatorium to help you forget about the jackdorseyboot on your neck.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: