← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Walter Yannis

Thread 5101

Thread ID: 5101 | Posts: 26 | Started: 2003-02-19

Wayback Archive

Walter Yannis [OP]

2003-02-19 11:21 | User Profile

Here is a refreshingly forthright article about the Trotskyite roots of the neo-cons.

Mr. Schwartz takes the line long advanced on the Trotskyite Left that Trotsky's heart was in the right place, and that it all went terribly wrong when Stalin took power. Being a Trotskyite - the very architects of War Communism - wasn't such a bad thing. Trotskyites are nice even if they were a bit foolish, it was the Stalinsts that were bad. The neo-cons are ideologically the same Jews who made the "Russian" Revolution along with Lenin, but who have come to see that it's better to infiltrate and attack the culture rather than make a frontal assault.

The author admits as much here.

The subtext is that the Trotskyites were (like Trotsky-Bronshtein himself) Jews who were maneuvered out of power in 1932-1937 by Georgians Stalin and Beria, and their Russian military allies.

I can't believe that Bill Buckley ever let these barely-disguised infiltrators into our movement.

Neo-cons make my skin crawl.

Walter

By Stephen Schwartz

FrontPageMagazine.com | February 19, 2003

America and the Free World stand at a crossroads. There are many historical echoes now of 1941, when America joined battle against Nazi and Japanese imperialism, and of 1950, when America rescued South Korea from Communist aggression.

America today leads a coalition facing as great a danger as those our fathers and grandfathers faced: that of Islamist extremism. Fuelled by Saudi Arabia’s totalitarian Wahhabi death cult, armed by the Communazi-style dictator of Iraq and supported both by ungrateful past beneficiaries of American blood sacrifice in Europe and by a seditious and subversive pseudo-peace movement in the West, the coalition of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein threatens order and peace throughout the world.

It is up to America to restore peace, to rescue the victims of oppression, and to lead the way to a new era of stability, prosperity, and popular sovereignty in the Arab and Islamic worlds.

Nevertheless, America is not united in this commitment. For some months, a fake “peace movement” has sent its ragtag regiments into the streets to oppose our President and the effort he is waging.

It is often said there is nothing new under the sun, and as we watch the robotic Reds march by it is important to know who has organized these putrid parades.

The main entity involved in filling our streets with treasonous propaganda is a nasty little cult that calls itself the Workers World Party (WWP), controllers of a front group known as International ANSWER. WWP isn’t a party organized by the workers of the world. Rather, it is an embryo of the Communist secret police that its members and cult leaders would like to impose on the workers of America, and then of the world.

Front groups are old news in the history of Communism. They first emerged in the 1920s when Soviet agents adopted the practice of hiding their agenda behind liberal slogans. In fact, this represented a break with Leninist practice; when the Bolsheviks spoke of “useful idiots” they referred to liberals who knew what the revolutionaries intended, but who could be drawn into their orbit nonetheless. Stalinism perfected the practice of recruiting duped people who believed they were supporting “peace,” “feeding the hungry,” and “human rights,” when they marched to advance the war aims of the USSR, planned famines, and the Gulag.

For seven decades in America, extreme leftists practiced this form of public deception. They established phony cultural groups that sought to mask crude propaganda as art and literature. They created “civil rights groups” that viciously attacked Black leaders like A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin for refusing to toe the Soviet line. They proclaimed “unity” in unions they controlled, so as to cut corrupt deals with employers.

But in the 1950s and 1960s they really came into their own, fostering “peace” movements that advocated far and wide for surrender to Russian imperialism. [NB: the truth comes out. The CPSU wasn't the same Party after the Doctor's Plot - not many Jews in decision making power after that. It really was Russian imperialism]

WWP and International ANSWER today represent a classic example of such a strategy. One of WWP’s outstanding “personalities” is a woman named Gloria LaRiva, with whom I have long personal experience. From the middle of the 1990s to the end of the decade I was secretary of the Newspaper Guild in Northern California, a union representing the employees of the San Francisco Chronicle, Examiner, and other local newspapers.

I make no apologies for the militancy of the Newspaper Guild or for our role in winning the big strike of 1994. But I feel I must apologize to the people of the Bay Area for the tolerance I and others showed to LaRiva and her band of saboteurs. [Translation: "sure I infiltrated the union movement, but hey I did it for Jewish power, and now I really regret that I was in coalition with unuseful goys")

Comrade LaRiva dedicated herself, for many years, to the disruption of the union movement in the Bay Area. They specialized in gossip, irresponsible accusations, and other forms of manipulation. Their aim was simple: to gain power over the union workers as, a half century before, their mentors in the Communist apparatus seized and betrayed unions all over America.

She and her ilk fantasize about the day they can torture patriotic Americans, and even dissident leftists, to death in the cellars of secret prisons, as their mentors and models have done for decades in the countries they admire: Cuba and North Korea, followed by Stalinofascist Serbia and Saddamite Iraq. (as if such fantasies didn't animate the Trotskyites and their don't animate the neo-cons)

The WWP, of which Comrade LaRiva is a fanatical member, represents the very lowest of the low among leftist bottom-feeders.

The party has only a few dozen members. Few of them are workers. But they represent something especially filthy and vile in the Marxist-Leninist zoo: Trotskyists who became Stalinists.

For most readers such a description means nothing, so let me explain.

Trotskyists were Communists whose leader and other heroes were murdered in Stalin’s purges. Of course, conservatives despise all Communists. But Trotskyists denounced the Russian purges when the liberals of the world were busy acclaiming the justice of Stalin’s system. Trotskyists assailed Stalin’s long romance with Hitler, culminating in the infamous 1939-41 Nazi-Soviet pact that allowed the German dictator to unleash war in Western Europe.

The best leftist minds of their generation were Trotskyists. They included many individuals who became leading conservatives and neoconservatives: James Burnham, Irving Kristol, and a long list of others. That was because, even though they defended an illegitimate ideology, Trotskyists swam against the stream of admiration for Stalinism. They learned the value of holding an independent opinion, and that led them, finally, to their break with the left.

Today’s equivalents of the ex-Trotskyists who moved over to the conservative and patriotic side of the spectrum 50 to 60 years ago include Ronald Radosh, David Horowitz, Christopher Hitchens, and myself (full disclosure here).

For a Trotskyist to become a conservative involves nothing more than, in some cases, growing up; in others, realizing that the defeat of Stalinism could only come through alliance with and support for the democratic West. And for a few others, it meant recognition that capitalism and local democracy are surer means for the people of the world to attain prosperity than state economics and centralized government.

But there can be nothing more repellent than a Trotskyist who becomes a Stalinist. The spectacle of a slave worshipping his chains would be less wretched than that of a Trotskyist who embraces the politics of Trotsky’s assassins.

WWP was founded by a miserable, obscure little man named Sam Ballan, based in Buffalo, New York. He was a long-time member of the main Trotskyist group in America – the Socialist Workers’ Party, of which James Burnham was a founder. In the mid-50s, he began to crave a party of his own. He used the political alias “Marcy,” presumably a combination of “Marx” and “Trotsky,” though his heritage more justifies it being seen as a neologism coined from “massacre” and “messy.” WWP was therefore known as “Marcyites.”

Messy Marcy began by hailing the suppression of the people of Hungary by the Russians in 1956 – at a time when other leftists, including many Moscow-lining Stalinists, recoiled in horror at the bloodshed in Budapest.

He went on to support the Chinese in their brutal attack on Tibet in 1959.

Throughout the ‘60s there was no Communist dictatorship in the world the Marcyites would not support. They were viewed with contempt by most leftist activists during the Vietnam war period.

And then came the crash of Soviet Communism. Russia had shoveled millions of dollars down the rathole of the world Communist movement, while its own citizens went without decent food and clothing. Russia had also kept Castro’s Cuba afloat and used Havana as a pipeline for more support to ragged leftist fringe groups. With the end of Communism, most of the sects with Marxist-Leninist monickers faded away.

But not the WWP. They found backers. In North Korea, in Saddamite Iraq, and in the Yugoslavia of Slobodan Milosevic, Communist butcher of the Balkan Muslims.

They traveled back and forth to exotic destinations like Pyongyang, issuing slick books and periodicals and holding meetings and demonstrations, promoting the worst human rights violators to appear at the end of the 20th century.

And now they lead thousands of “useful idiots,” burnouts, traitors, and terrorist sympathizers in marches through our streets, acclaiming a fake “peace.”

If you want to understand what this “peace movement” represents, rent the classic Hitchcock film Foreign Correspondent, in which a British “peace” agitator is unmasked as a Nazi agent.

International ANSWER does not want peace – it wants its heroes to continue threatening peace. It wants victory – victory for Saddam, so he can murder his own people; victory for Kim Jong-il, so he can starve his own people; victory for Milosevic, so his gangsters can continue to benefit from the riches they stole in Serbia, and placed in offshore banks in Cyprus, while their thugs cut the throats of Muslim grandmothers in Bosnia-Hercegovina and assassinated Albanian infants in Kosovo.

The organizers of these marches are serving the enemy’s agendas, and no American, regardless of his or her views on the impending conflict in Iraq, should find a place in their ratty ranks. As you watch them parade, ask them who pays them? Indeed, if you have time, why not produce and put up a sign, asking, WHO PAYS FOR THESE MARCHES? SADDAM OR KIM JONG-IL?

That is the real ANSWER we want. And the true answer will come. You can take that to the bank.

Stephen Schwartz, an author and journalist, is author of The Two Faces of Islam: The House of Sa'ud from Tradition to Terror. A vociferous critic of Wahhabism, Schwartz is a frequent contributor to National Review, The Weekly Standard, and other publications.

il ragno

2003-02-19 13:44 | User Profile

*All you need to know about why the present Administration needs to be defenestrated, down to its very last Jew, is in this column by rabid dog Suleyman Schwartz. Easily the sickest, most depraved neo of them all; a scuttling tick, barely human. Naturally, he's found sponsors and ready podiums with Kristol, Horowitz and The Spinning Buckley.

Insane, amoral, frothing-at-the-mouth wolfpack Jews now are firmly in control of our country, our military and our future - if we even have one of those. Suleyman doesn't even bother hiding his true face any longer: here he divides the world into Good Trotskyite/Bad Trotskyite.

They will NOT stop. Thus they must BE stopped. Enough is enough. *

il ragno

2003-02-19 14:03 | User Profile

If you want to understand what this “peace movement” represents, rent the classic Hitchcock film Foreign Correspondent, in which a British “peace” agitator is unmasked as a Nazi agent.

No,if you want to understand what this "war movement" represents, or the "multicultural movement" before it, or the "Pollard case", or the "campus radical movement", or the "Morgenthau plan", or the "Bolshevik movement" of 100 years ago that got the snowball rolling downhill......please rent the 1940 German documentary DER EWIGE JUDE. In which a "religion" is unmasked as a racial crime syndicate.

Sincere apologies, Walter. I posted this Schwartzian bilge w/o noticing you'd gotten there first.

My only excuse is something happens to me whenever I'm confronted with the gibbering insanity and squalid depravity of this squeaking vermin, Schwartz. Not much of an excuse ....but all I got at the moment.

Tex, feel free to delete my duplicationof this "essay".

Again, I apologize, Walter.

na Gaeil is gile

2003-02-19 14:37 | User Profile

[color=blue]Die for us goyim, DIE! or Why I Think You're Stupid by some neo-con hack [/color]

There are many historical echoes now of 1941, when America joined battle against Nazi and Japanese imperialism. [color=blue]Then, as now, America was maneuvered into that conflict by The Tribe and their traitorous White golems.[/color]

America today leads a coalition [color=blue]which is in[/color] as great a danger as those our fathers and grandfathers faced: that of [color=blue]Zionist[/color] extremism. Fuelled by [color=blue]an international Jewish[/color] totalitarian [color=blue]hate[/color] cult, armed by the Communazi-style dictator of [color=blue]the USA[/color] and supported both by ungrateful past beneficiaries of American blood sacrifice in Europe color=blue[/color] and by a seditious and subversive pseudo-[color=blue]conservative[/color] movement in the West, the coalition of [color=blue]Ariel Sharon[/color] and [color=blue]George Bush[/color] threatens order and peace throughout the world.

It is up to [color=blue]true American patriots[/color] to restore peace, to rescue the victims of oppression, and to lead the way to a new era of stability, prosperity, and popular sovereignty in the [color=blue]Eurosphere[/color].

Nevertheless, America is not united in this commitment. For some months, a fake [color=blue]conservative[/color] movement has sent its ragtag regiments into the [color=blue]press rooms[/color] to [color=blue]support their[/color] President and the [color=blue]criminal[/color] effort he is waging.

It is often said there is nothing new under the sun, and as we watch the robotic [color=blue]neo-cons rant[/color] it is important to know who has organized these putrid [color=blue]displays[/color].

The main entity involved in filling our [color=blue]country[/color] with treasonous propaganda is a nasty little cult that calls itself [color=blue]Judaism[/color], controllers of a front group known as [color=blue]the Republican party. The GOP[/color] isn’t a party organized by the [color=blue]white[/color] workers of the America. Rather, it is an embryo of the [color=blue]Zionist[/color] secret police that its members and cult leaders would like to impose on the workers of America, and then of the world.

Front groups are old news in the history of [color=blue]Zionism[/color]. They first emerged in the 19[color=blue]60[/color]s when [color=blue]neo-Marxist[/color] agents adopted the practice of hiding their agenda behind liberal slogans. In fact, this represented a break with Leninist practice; when the Bolsheviks spoke of 'useful idiots' they referred to liberals who knew what the revolutionaries intended, but who could be drawn into their orbit nonetheless. Stalinism perfected the practice of recruiting duped people who believed they were supporting peace, feeding the hungry, and human rights, when they marched to advance the [color=blue]anti-Occidental[/color] aims of the [color=blue]international Jewry[/color], planned [color=blue]White extinction[/color], and the Gulag.

For seven decades in America, extreme leftists practiced this form of public deception. They established phony cultural groups that sought to mask crude propaganda as art and literature. They created 'civil rights groups' that viciously attacked [color=blue]White[/color] leaders [color=blue]like Storm Thurmond and David Duke[/color] for refusing to toe the [color=blue]Jewish[/color] line. They proclaimed 'unity' in unions they controlled, so as to cut corrupt deals with employers.

But in the 1950s and 1960s they really came into their own, fostering [color=blue]'Civil Rights'[/color] movements that advocated far and wide for surrender [color=blue]of White Nationhood[/color]. [color=blue]The ADL[/color] and [color=blue]NAACP[/color] today represent a classic example of such a strategy. They [color=blue]specialize[/color] in [color=blue]race pimping[/color], irresponsible accusations, and other forms of manipulation. Their aim was simple: to gain power over the union workers as, a half century before, their mentors in the [color=blue]Germany[/color] seized and betrayed [color=blue]the German people[/color].

[color=blue]They and their[/color] ilk fantasize about the day they can torture patriotic Americans, and even dissident leftists, to death in the cellars of secret prisons, as their mentors and models have done for decades in [color=blue]a country[/color] they admire: [color=blue]Israel[/color]. [color=blue]Neo-conservatism[/color] represents the very lowest of the low among [color=blue]Zionist[/color] bottom-feeders. The party has only a few dozen [color=blue]Shabbos Goy tools, the rest are Jews[/color]. Few of them are workers. But they represent something especially filthy and vile in the [color=blue]traitor's[/color] zoo: [color=blue]White men[/color] who became [color=blue]Philo-Semites[/color].

For most readers such a description means nothing, so let me explain.

[color=blue]Neo-cons[/color] were communists whose leader[color=blue]s[/color] murdered in Stalin’s purges. Of course, [color=blue]REAL[/color] conservatives despise all Communists. But Trotskyists denounced the Russian purges when the liberals of the world were busy acclaiming the justice of Stalin’s system.

The [color=blue]most fiendish Jewish[/color] minds of their generation were [color=blue]Commies, Marxist, Leinist, Trotskyist; a commie is a commie[/color]. They included many individuals who became leading [color=blue]traitors[/color]: James Burnham, Irving Kristol, and a long list of others. That was because, even though they defended an illegitimate ideology, [color=blue]commie scum[/color] swam [color=blue]with[/color] the stream of [color=blue]infiltration[/color]. They learned the value of [color=blue]doing exactly as the Jews say[/color], and that led them, finally, to their break with [color=blue]decency, morality, loyalty to one's religion and nation[/color].

Today’s equivalents of the [color=blue]lice in human form[/color] who moved over to the [color=blue]faux-[/color]conservative and [color=blue]Zionist[/color] side of the spectrum 50 to 60 years ago include Ronald Radosh, David Horowitz, Christopher Hitchens, and myself (full disclosure [color=blue]as a serpent at your breast[/color] here).

For a [color=blue]commie scumbag[/color] to become a [color=blue]neo-[/color]conservative involves nothing more than, in some cases, [color=blue]buying treasonous Whites[/color]; in others, realizing that the defeat of [color=blue]European peoples[/color] could only come through [color=blue]infiltration[/color] and [color=blue]perversion of[/color] the democratic West. And for a few others, it meant recognition that capitalism and local democracy are surer means for the people of the world to [color=blue]become slaves to our New World Order[/color].

But there can be nothing more repellent than a [color=blue]White man[/color] who becomes a [color=blue]neo-conservative[/color]. [color=blue]White neo-conservatism is the[/color] spectacle of a slave worshipping his chains.

[color=blue]Neo-conservatism[/color] was founded by a miserable, little [color=blue]tribe[/color] based [color=blue]mainly in[/color] New York. [color=blue]They are[/color] long-time member[color=blue]s[/color] of the main [color=blue]anti-Western[/color] group in America [color=blue]the Democrats[/color].

WHO [color=blue]BENIFITS FROM THE WAR ON IRAQ[/color]? [color=blue]AMERICA[/color] OR [color=blue]ISRAEL[/color]?

That is the real ANSWER we want. And the true answer will come. You can take that to the bank.

il ragno

2003-02-19 15:03 | User Profile

Give em hell, Gaeil!

**But there can be nothing more repellent than a [color=blue]White man[/color] who becomes a [color=blue]neo-conservative[/color]. **

Amen, and amen.

mwdallas

2003-02-19 16:24 | User Profile

**Trotskyists were Communists whose leader and other heroes were murdered in Stalin’s purges. Of course, conservatives despise all Communists. But Trotskyists denounced the Russian purges when the liberals of the world were busy acclaiming the justice of Stalin’s system. **

The victims of the purges denounced the purges? What extraordinary moral fibre!

mwdallas

2003-02-19 16:40 | User Profile

You want frothing-at-the-mouth? Check out this guy, a "British" "journalist":

[url=http://www.stephenpollard.net/]http://www.stephenpollard.net/[/url]

Yeah, that's Pollard, like the spy, who must be within three degrees of consanguinity of this beast. The most dismaying thing is that I encountered this blog through a post by an alumnus of John Caldwell Calhoun's university, who concurred in Pollard's assessment that this is, literally, a matter of life and death.

**I am a warmonger. I am bloodthirsty. I am rabid. My friends want only peace and harmony, but I want to wreak destruction and killing. I want to see British soldiers doing the Texan moron’s dirty work for him. **

Almost alone among my friends, I did not go on The March. My absence was not due to ambivalence, but because I considered the march to be contemptible. I think the marchers are not only wrong but dangerously, wilfully, shamefully wrong.

Since this is, literally, a matter of life and death, I have been prepared to tell them precisely why I think that they are so in error. Their response has been to tell me what they think of me.

In all my 38 years, I have never before felt such a sense of personal shock. I am shocked that so many of my friends would rather a brutal dictator remained in power — for that would be the direct consequence if their views won out — than support military action by the United States. I am ashamed that they would rather believe the words of President Saddam Hussein than those of their own Prime Minister. I am nauseated that they would rather give succour to evil than think through the implications of their gut feelings. It is a shocking experience to realise that your friends are either mindless, deluded or malevolent.

I used to think that 9/11 was the most important day of my life. It was indeed a day which transformed the world; its influence will be felt for decades, if not centuries. But however foul the “America had it coming” refrain, that came mainly from the usual suspects. This is different. This time the words come from friends.

I have many friends with whom I disagree politically; it would be a small-minded person who could not say that. But this goes beyond mere politics. This is about fundamentals. And what makes it truly shocking is how many normal, apolitical, otherwise decent people are so deeply wrong, so stridently misguided.

I have tried to point out that saying you are in favour of “peace” is meaningless. Which sane person is not? The question is: peace on whose, and what, terms? If it is peace on the terms of brutal dictators, secured by allowing them to build up whatever weapons arsenals they wish, then that is not peace. It is suicide.

Aha, but it is the UN which should decide this, not the US. Tell them it has, through 17 resolutions, and they tell you that Iraq should not be singled out for action, or that we need to give the arms inspectors “more time” — as if 12 years were not enough. And what should we do when they have had more time? “You are just looking for an excuse for war.”

Most of my friends on The March could not place Iraq on a map, let alone describe the contents of Resolution 1441, which finds that “Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations” and imposes a deadline “not later than 30 days from the date of this resolution” for Iraq to supply “a currently accurate, full, and complete declaration” — a date which fell on December 9. Tell them this, and they say that it’s critical to stick by the UN, without being able to grasp the contradiction.

How can I use the word “friend” to describe such people? It is not that they are wrong, but that our moral frameworks are so entirely different. They wallow in their sense of superiority, but what they wish to protest against, I thank God for. What they consider an affront, I salute. What they regard as a moral outrage, I regard as the only safe way to conduct world affairs. What they stand for, I feel sickened by.

This is not about Left versus Right. It is about freedom: those who are willing to protect it, and those who take it for granted.

Walter Yannis

2003-02-20 07:01 | User Profile

Originally posted by il ragno@Feb 19 2003, 14:03 ** > If you want to understand what this “peace movement” represents, rent the classic Hitchcock film Foreign Correspondent, in which a British “peace” agitator is unmasked as a Nazi agent.

No,if you want to understand what this "war movement" represents, or the "multicultural movement" before it, or the "Pollard case", or the "campus radical movement", or the "Morgenthau plan", or the "Bolshevik movement" of 100 years ago that got the snowball rolling downhill......please rent the 1940 German documentary DER EWIGE JUDE. In which a "religion" is unmasked as a racial crime syndicate.

Sincere apologies, Walter. I posted this Schwartzian bilge w/o noticing you'd gotten there first.

My only excuse is something happens to me whenever I'm confronted with the gibbering insanity and squalid depravity of this squeaking vermin, Schwartz. Not much of an excuse ....but all I got at the moment.

Tex, feel free to delete my duplicationof this "essay".

Again, I apologize, Walter. **

No sweat.

I've done a couple double posts m'own self.

What really burns my butt is Bill Buckley's opening the door to the conservative movement to FREEKING TROTSKYITES.

The depth of that man's treason has not yet been plumbed.

By the way, there was an interesting historical piece on Russian television (Madrussian, where art thou?), based on recently-declassified documents. It was all about how Lenin himself stole millions and millions of dollars from the USSR at the height of the Civil War by setting up a bogus construction project. This project was a railroad/pipeline to an oil field in Kazakhstan. It was clear that there wasn't a lot of oil there, and that it didn't make sense to build it, much less to canabalize the existing pipeline through Grozny (in Chechnya, yes it was a big problem even back then). But the order went out, thousands of people died of starvation (including many who died while transporting barrels of crude oil to Astrakhan by camel caravan!), and Lenin managed to spirit away gazillions in gold rubles. The show hinted strongly that this was the reason for the untimely deaths of both Frunze and Dzerzhinsky, who got wind of the scheme. Arch-gangster Stalin used the same methods and insiders (former Tsarist Railroad Minister Lomonosov) until his death in 1953.

A lovilier group of criminals you've never met.

This was the Party of Trotsky. These are the men the neo-cons claim as their spiritual fathers, and they're right. Trotsky-Broshtein is exactly that.

Walter

il ragno

2003-02-20 07:37 | User Profile

A minor addl point to Comrade Sandalio's Video Pick of the Week.

If there is one 40s-era filmmaker he ought not cite...particularly to bolster his grotesque, coloring-book History Of The 20th Century...it's Hitchcock, and FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT.

I have no idea of Sir Alfred's politics and I don't condemn filmmakers of that era for their anti-Nazism (with certain rare exceptions such as the Communist infiltrators in the Screen Writers Guild); there was a war on, patriotic sentiment was high and the various studios were under govt pressure to produce pro-Allied propaganda. But if there was one director who consistently avoided turning Nazis into cartoon werewolves, it was Hitchcock. Nearly all of his Nazis were sympathetic characters.

In FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT the British “peace” agitator unmasked as a Nazi agent is played by Herbert Marshall. Although the audience is in on his duplicitousness from the midway point of the picture, we never totally turn against him...his obvious noble qualities are underlined at several junctures, his love for his daughter is genuine and affecting, and in the climax,he selflessly gives his life to save the other characters after a disaster at sea. Furthermore, the word "Nazi" is never uttered during the film: the bad guys are never specifically named (other than being shadowy central Europeanswho speak accented English), only alluded to.

In 1944 Hitchcock came under fire for LIFEBOAT, a film in which the strongest, smartest and most resilient character is clearly the Nazi (Walter Slezak). The critical backlash caused a mini-furor that cost him an Oscar nomination for Best Director.

In 1946, Hitchcock's NOTORIOUS was so ambivalent about Good Guys and Bad Guys that we come away from the film feeling genuine sympathy for the Nazi (Claude Rains), who has been mercilessly used and set up to be murdered by the cold, cruelly manipulative OSS agent (Cary Grant). Though there is much expository badinage paying lip-service against the murderous Third Reich, the actual emotional momentum of the storyline continually blurs the moral clarity of Hero/Villain by portraying Rains as much more human & vulnerable a character than the cynically methodical Grant.

They didn't give Hitch many WW2 movie projects after that.

So it's doubly indicative of what a putz Comrade Sandalio truly is - to cite the ONE director in Hollywood most likely to treat Nazis as three-dimensional characters as a support beam for his shabby ideological lean-to!

Walter, you are correct. Horowitz, Murdoch & Kristol you expect this from....but that Suleyman would find a light in the window for him at NR speaks volumes for the hollow man Buckley has truly become.

Okiereddust

2003-02-20 08:31 | User Profile

Originally posted by Walter Yannis@Feb 20 2003, 07:01 **What really burns my butt is Bill Buckley's opening the door to the conservative movement to FREEKING TROTSKYITES. 

The depth of that man's treason has not yet been plumbed.

**

My thoughts exactly Walter. Its not so much people like Schwartz I can't stand (at least he's honest as to what he stands for) as the traitors who let him inside the house, on the false pretense they had changed their ways.

Read this amazing admission again.

Today’s equivalents of the ex-Trotskyists who moved over to the conservative and patriotic side of the spectrum 50 to 60 years ago include Ronald Radosh, David Horowitz, Christopher Hitchens, and myself (full disclosure here).

For a Trotskyist to become a conservative involves nothing more than, in some cases, growing up; in others, realizing that the defeat of Stalinism could only come through alliance with and support for the democratic West.****

Get that? NOTHING MORE.

You can just generalize from here and see all the things a Trotskyite becoming a neoconservative does not involve. Read through the Communist Manifesto and see what parts of this people like Schwartz must necessarily repudiate by becoming neocons. Answer very little.

The Communists disdain to conceal their aims. The openly declare that their goals may only be achieved by the forceable overthrow of existing social conditions.

Sertorius

2003-02-22 10:05 | User Profile

Walter,

You and everyone else on this thread have done such a good job placing this column by Schwartz in its proper perspective that it will be pinned so as for others to see the truly evil face of our enemies unmasked.

**Trotskyists were Communists whose leader and other heroes were murdered in Stalin's purges. Of course, conservatives despise all Communists. But Trotskyists denounced the Russian purges when the liberals of the world were busy acclaiming the justice of Stalin's system. **

Oh yes, they were just overflowing with love for their fellow man, always ready to put others ahead of themselves. This is such lying, self-serving tripe!

If they had been to top, it would have been Stalin, Malenkov, ect. who would have been shot instead. These "principled" Trotskyites, once imprisoned, never helpd their fellow prisoners. No, they were what Orwell called "good thinkers," and everyone else there in jail deserved to be save themselves. They were as sorry a lot as one can find.

I can actually say something kind about Stalin. In 1938 Stalin had all the Trotskyites under his control assembled at a place called the "Old Brickyard" after a hunger strike they thought they had won at Vorkuta. In April they were marched into the Tundra where they were all machinned gun to death.

It couldnt have happened to a more deserving bunch. Too bad Schwartz wasnt among them.

Combat 26

2003-04-30 15:23 | User Profile

The real bee in Sandalio's bonnet is not that the anti-war movement is Marxist, but simply that they are the wrong kind of Marxists. Back in the "good old days," Jews ran or at the very least dominated the Communist movement and used it to advance their interests. When Marxist ideology fell into the hands of Arabs and other peoples who weren't so friendly towards Jews (including the Soviet Union as it shook off the reigns of Judaeo-Bolshevism and moved in the direction of a National Bolshevism), suddenly the Sandalios of the world change their tune and tell us, "but we've been anti-Communists all along."

I'll take that as an admission that the "true American right" was never against Communism PER SE to begin with--just against Communism that benefited "the wrong people" (Comrade Abraham's descendants). Is that about right?

What it's really all about is that with the populist-socialist genie out of the bottle, control of the Left has slipped out of Jewish hands, perhaps permanently.

Wow. I'll take that as an admission that the "true American right" has never even been opposed to leftism PER SE as long as it doesn't benefit "the wrong people" (Comrade Moses' followers).

I assume also that your endorsement of Ramsey Clark elsewhere is an admission that you aren't even opposed to "race mixing" per se as long as an Israel-hater does the "mixing." You people sure are principled, aren't you?

It's too bad I can't share some of our private correspondence with your "pro-republic" (except in Prussia, where they're pro-monarchy) colleagues, but it seems that the decadent, immoral, communist (the bad kind!) Torah forbids disclosing anything confided in a private conversation without the explicit permission of the other party. Decadent Jews!

Okay. You can go back to helping the pro-sovereignty, anti-UN European nations fight against Kurt Waldheim and his Zionist UN. Morons.

Texas Dissident

2003-04-30 20:35 | User Profile

Combat 26,

I'll leave it in AY's most capable hands to dissect your argument, but I will say this. With regards to your argument here, what strikes me is that AY's perspective is that of an honest, traditional conservative American and yours is that of a sycophantic, judaized Zionist goy puppet.

But again, that's just what jumps out at me. I could be wrong.

Shalom

Franco

2003-04-30 21:55 | User Profile

AY wrote: "I will respond here both to your comments above, as well as some of your FR threads where you lavish praise onto your newfound guru "Comrade Sandalio-Suleyman" Schwartz."

Oooooo -- a neocon Freeper. Let's have some fun.

Tell me, Combat -- are you partly-Jewish? Fully-Jewish? Which?

:hit: :hit: :hit: :hit: :hit:

[quote edited]

Texas Dissident

2003-05-02 07:54 | User Profile

**[url=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/903599/posts?page=59#59]http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/903...osts?page=59#59[/url]

I agree with what most of the responses to this post have said, with one exception. I've noticed that most people think that anti-Semites are funny or humorous. I disagree. I don't think they're funny at all.

Yesterday I paid our little friends at "Original Dissent" a visit (you know, the dishonest liars who claimed here they weren't anti-Semites while admitting there that they were?). And I found some interesting things.

"Communism," per se, isn't bad any more. It was bad when it was "invented" and "used" by the Jews (these people seem to think that Leon Trotsky was David HaMelekh), but the minute they lost their "control" and Stalin turned it into "national bolshevism" it suddenly became good. So not only is only "Jewish" Communism subversive while non-Jewish Communism is not, but Jewish anti-Communism is also subversive! Do you find such admissions by people who claim the Jews "forced" them to hate them by being "Communists" to be funny? They are openly admitting they are dishonest liars. So much for "aryan" honor.

So now "Stalinism," as opposed to "Trotskyism" (you know, the genuine Communism of Moses) is good. This means that while just a short while ago these people were claiming that Stalin, North Korea, Cuba, etc., were secretly ruled by Israel, these people can now switch 180 degrees and defend them from subversive Jewish anti-Communists because they are "national bolsheviks!"

But there's more. It seems that the Jews have lost "control" of "their" Left and it has now fallen into the hands of "people who don't care for them" (Arabs and their Third World allies). Just as the "true Right" isn't against Communism per se, so it isn't even against leftism per se, as long as it is being carried out or advocated by enemies of the Jews. And this from people who claimed just the day before yesterday that they hated the Jews because the Jews were leftists! Now when anti-Semites become leftists (or vice versa) that old cause-effect doesn't work any more! Why don't they just put on villain outfits and say, "look at us, we're evil liars who never meant a single excuse we ever gave because we're Satan incarnate! BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!"

But there's more! These people also used to claim that they hated the Jews because the Jews were "race-mixers!" Well now guess what! Ramsey Clark, "race-mixer" par excellence, is now their hero because he hates Israel! Now I may not be a professional logician, but if these people truly hated Jews because they are "race-mixers," wouldn't they hate Ramsey Clark as well? Why don't they go into professional wrestling as "heels" with devil horns on???

And there's still more!!! It turns out that these people hate the Jews "because" the Jews "supported the Albanians against the Serbs" (a gross generalization that never applied to the extreme religio-nationalist Right Zionists, btw). Who are the Albanians? They are--horrors!--MOSLEMS defiling the heart of chrstian Europe! Actually of course, the Albanians are Indo-Europeans (the Illyrians) who under Turkish aegis converted from Eastern Orthodoxy to islam centuries ago. But get this . . . these Indo-European converts to islam (whom I oppose as I oppose all islam) are DEFILING "chrstian europe" while these same "proud aryans" support the mass transfer of Semitic Arab moslems (complete with all the facial characteristics they claim "causes" them to hate Jews) to France, in fact changing the racial makeup of the country! Could it . . . might it be possible that the islam of the Albanians really has nothing to do with anything? Or perhaps these people will claim next that if the moslems in the Balkans were Semitic Arabs instead of Indo-European Albanians no good "aryan" would have a single objection? Will "honorable aryans" remain anti-Albanian when the Albanians join the anti-Israel crusade?

Why don't these deliberate, open villains slither on the ground? They certainly do enjoy flaunting their dishonesty!

Ah, but there's still more! As you know, the Jews have not always been leftists, or communists, or race-mixers, or Trotskyite anti-Stalinists. Perhaps before they were all these things (which "caused" the anti-Semites to hate them) they were all right? Not at all! Because even though they were none of these things--not one of them--in medieval Europe, they nevertheless "subverted" chrstian civilization. How? By being "Talmudists." Before that they perpetrated animal sacrifices. In the later middle ages they were capitalists. Then they were all those other things, each one of which "subverted" civilization and "caused" the Jew-haters to hate them! And tomorrow a Jew will doubtless subvert chrstian civilization by using the restroom or by brething or by going to work! In other words, the Jew-haters don't hate the Jews because of anything the Jews do or have ever done. They decide to hate the actions only because Jews do them. Could anything possibly be more "self-evident?" And these smirking maggots throw this blatant hypocrisy, these blatant lies, in our faces and laugh at us . . . and we're supposed to think it's FUNNY?????

Perhaps the new compound word "lyingshysteraryan" should be introduced to the dictionary. They enjoy their blatant hypocrisy so much I'm sure they would wallow in the infamy!

I'm sorry, folks, but I don't think they're funny at all. I don't want to laugh at them. I don't want to dismiss them. I don't want to shake my head and click my tongue. I don't want to do anything to them. But I sure wish Someone Else would, and I don't mean Abe Foxman or Elie Wiesel or Simon Wiesenthal or 'Avi Dershowitz either! I wish that the real object of their hatred, to Whom they offer the ultimate insult by ignoring Him, would split open the mirage of reality we live in, reveal His Awful G-dliness, and pour forth such fury upon them that they would suffer torments beyond anything Saddam Hussein (y'sh"v) could ever dream in his most twisted nightmares. I want Him to force them to crawl on their knees, drop the nonsense about noses and bankers, and admit that it was HE Whom they really hated all along. I want the blatant, open, intentionally lying "aryan" tongues to say the Awful Name that no man may speak and break into flame as they say "HaShem is G-d! HaShem is G-d! HaShem is G-d!" for all eternity. That's what I want. As the subversive talmudist/capitalist/trotskyist/anti-Stalinist/race-mixing/ restroom-using Kahanists say, it is because there is no vengeance that men do not believe in G-d.

And these people, many of them atheists, have the gall to claim to be the "ultimate anti-Communists" (even though Communism isn't bad any more). When FR was created they came here and claimed it as their territory (this place swarmed with the vermin until their buddies committed mass murder on 9/11). Anytime any website, forum, web ring, magazine, or anything so much as uses the terms "conservative" or "anti-Communist" they think they have the right to take it over. These miserable materialist fans of Madelyn Murray O'Hair actually think they have those terms legally copyrighted and can sue anyone else who uses them!

I am going to say it one more time. I know that I am a misfit here at FR, and I accept that. I can be banned at any time by JR, and I accept that because this is his site and I'm just a guest. I know I must try his patience terribly sometimes. But nevertheless, I'm going to say this one more time: the essential error of Communism is not that it is "big government" or "progressive" or cruel or anything else--it is that it is a non-Theistically based value system. Anyone else with a non-Theistically based value system--regardless of how "small government" or "traditionalist" it may be, is in essence no different. Nor are atheist Jewish liberals essentially any different from the atheist Nazis who hate them. The problem is not people who "hate" or who "subvert." The problem is people who think that any objective moral vision can exist in the absence of G-d. That is why my by-line is the provocative "G-d's laws or NONE!!!" I don't have that there to intentionally offend anyone or seem like a crank. I have that there because that is what I believe, and if I even allowed anyone to have the impression that I subscribe to a non-Theistic moral system, however "benign" it might be, I would be no better than Dershowitz or Stalin or Revilo P. Oliver or the folks at OD. I say that because I am compelled to.

My last plea is to the Jews here on FR. I have never said this, but I know that I must embarrass you at times. For me we are still living in the days of Yehoshua Bin Nun and I do not understand the awful silence about G-d (outside the minyan), the appeals to "religious freedom" or "tolerance" or to 18th Century rationalist deist Anglo-American freemasons. Those things are outside the experience of one living in the days of Yehoshua Bin Nun. I do not understand the stress on a purely ethnic self-defense, of a "'ahavat Yisra'el" that dismisses the issue of G-d and encompesses people who would in other circumstances be subject to cheirem or `ir haniddachat. The "Jew-haters" really do not hate your noses. They hate HaShem, and they prove this by their awful, spiteful, hate-filled silence, their utter ignoring of Him as though He did not exist, G-d forbid. If they want to "destroy" Him (chas vechalilah!) by silence, then it is because they are vermin. But why don't Jews mention him? Why doesn't Dershowitz mention him? Why don't Wiesel or Wiesenthal or Foxman? Why don't Torah Jews who are Theocrats within the minyan, mention G-d when marching against the worms such as are over at OD? Why is it always about "bigotry" or "prejudice" or "intolerance" or something? How many Jews subscribe to a non-Theistic value system? How many who do not nevertheless seem to do so?

If I have done nothing else I hope I have shown you that these people are not interested in your noses, your money, your accents, or anything else. They hate HaShem, not you, as deflating as they may be. Please I beg you, as a Noachide who has forsaken the beliefs and practices of a lifetime to cling to you, do what the vile, filthy, perverted vermin who oppose you will not.

I beg you . . . break the awful silence.

SAY HIS NAME!!!!!

59 posted on 05/01/2003 11:37 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (G-d's laws or NONE!!!) **

PaleoconAvatar

2003-05-02 14:31 | User Profile

**If I have done nothing else I hope I have shown you that these people are not interested in your noses, your money, your accents, or anything else. They hate HaShem, not you, as deflating as they may be. Please I beg you, as a Noachide who has forsaken the beliefs and practices of a lifetime to cling to you, do what the vile, filthy, perverted vermin who oppose you will not.

I beg you . . . break the awful silence.

SAY HIS NAME!!!!!**

Okay, I'll say it....Betelgeuse! No? How about....Rumplestiltskin?

Texas Dissident

2003-05-02 16:31 | User Profile

Originally posted by PaleoconAvatar@May 2 2003, 09:31 Okay, I'll say it....Betelgeuse! No? How about....Rumplestiltskin?

Have you ever in all your life read such, PA?

Clinical psychosis, sure, but does it constitute a threat?

PaleoconAvatar

2003-05-02 17:22 | User Profile

Originally posted by Texas Dissident@May 2 2003, 12:31 > Originally posted by PaleoconAvatar@May 2 2003, 09:31 Okay, I'll say it....Betelgeuse! No? How about....Rumplestiltskin?**

Have you ever in all your life read such, PA?

Clinical psychosis, sure, but does it constitute a threat?**

No, TD, this is the first time I've ever encountered a "Zionist Conspirator."

My assessment is that he certainly is committed to his positions--the length and passion of his post indicate this. He also has a clear sense of who his enemies are. I wonder where he educated himself about the topics he mentions--he seems to have an entire vocabulary and set of concepts that inform his unusual position. I have to assume that he must be reading some sort of Hebrew texts, given the words he uses. Some sort of convert to "fundamentalist" Judaism, I take it? I don't know enough about this sort of thing to know what those texts are, or who his "guru" is, or what exactly the goals of his movement are, beyond the fact that it's clearly some form of radical religious movement. It is also obvious that he opposes right-wing paleos, so I know that he's likely to be my permanent opponent.

In terms of his being a threat, I'd say no. His style of argumentation is what will contain his influence. No one will take someone that high-strung seriously. Also, his language and arguments are much too esoteric to catch on with people. People will see him for the nut he is and tune him out.

I highly doubt he's any kind of physical threat. If he were, he'd be more of a "man of action" and we wouldn't find him on the Internet writing 50,000 word rants. He is, at most, an annoyance--I'm sure the editor of his local newspaper regularly receives letters like this from him in the mail, which are no doubt promptly thrown in the wastebasket.

One thing is certain:

My last plea is to the Jews here on FR. I have never said this, but I know that I must embarrass you at times.

--I'll bet he really is an embarassment to the Jews at FR. At the same time, though, he might actually make some of them look rational in comparison.

Walter Yannis

2003-05-04 15:27 | User Profile

I like Zionist Conspirator - he's an interesting and clearly knowledgeable guy. He'd make a great contribution to our holy deliberations here.

If you're out there, ZC, I for one would really appreciate your becoming an OD regular.

Among us OD regulars are Nazis (like our invaluable correspondent NeoNietzsche), Pagans (Wintermute), Calvinists (like our fearless leader, Texas Dissident), unreconstructed Papists (like your truly), and we even have one putative Hindu (Rban) who keeps things jumping.

ZC, while I can't speak for everyone here, I can say that I don't hate Jews. I really don't consider myself to be an anti-Semite, although I suppose you would hold me as such. I believe that Jews should have their own country, and that the very great majority of Jews should move there, like Theodore Herzl or (Heaven help me) Ariel Sharon believed and taught. I have no problem with Israel as a nation. It's the American Diaspora that's really getting on my nerves. I wish Israel well, I just don't them doing it on my dime.

Live and let live, that's what I say. And I think that pretty much sums up TD's take on things, too.

I also don't hate Ha Shem, I just don't believe he exists. While we Catholics worship a different God (the Unmoved Mover) from that of you Noahides (the Holy Blessed One and his sister-consort Shekhinah), the same can be said for all the great religions of the world. We need more constructive dialogue among adherents the world's great religions, not less. And I'm sure that you'd teach me a thing or two along the way.

So, please join us here on the OD Forum. I think you'll find the conversation interesting, and I'm sure that TD will keep it within bounds (you will need a thick skin though, especially when dealing with our dear friend Rban).

I don't doubt that you're up to the task.

Welcome!

Warmest regards,

Walter

Walter Yannis

2003-05-05 07:01 | User Profile

Originally posted by AntiYuppie@May 4 2003, 19:00 ** While this isn't and shouldn't be a carte blanche "free speech" forum (people have been removed for vulgarity, disruption, etc), I can't help but notice the utter contrast between the way Texas Dissident handles views that conflict with the majority here and the way FR's neocon moderators treat dissenting posters.

**

Very well put, thank you.

TD does a great job of encouraging free debate.

With a few exceptions, nearly all of us OD regulars are interested in the Truth with a capital "T."

Since a free debate is conducive to outing the Truth, I'm all for free debate.

ZC is welcome here as far as I'm concerned.

I would throughly enjoy dissecting all of the arguments set out in his FR post above.

I would add that just as nobody here wants Arab immigration to France, so too none of us support Josef Stalin (Dzhugashvili). Don't know where ZC got that one from, but we'll never figure it out on FR because we'd be banned there in five minutes.

The only choice is for ZC to join us here.

C'mon, ZC old buddy old kid.

Jump right in, the water's fine!

Walter

Otho_Isch

2003-10-02 04:10 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Rob_in_Canada]The Left has never been "controlled by Jews".[/QUOTE]

:blink:

"Some call it Marxism -- I call it Judaism."

-Rabbi Stephen Wise, 1935

TBP

2004-04-23 19:11 | User Profile

Do you have a link to this article so I can share it on some other boards where I post?

Faust

2004-10-02 10:16 | User Profile

Zionist Conspirator is as loony as they come.

Wher the hell did he pick up this nonsense. [QUOTE]same "proud aryans" support the mass transfer of Semitic Arab moslems (complete with all the facial characteristics they claim "causes" them to hate Jews) to France, [/QUOTE]

I do not think anyone at OD is pro-Arab.

Now he right that some very foolish Rightist are nice to Stalin because of his fight with Trotsky, which prue foolishness. Bolshevism was still Bolshevism even under Stalin.

The fact that this sick animal is not a jew makes him even more sickening! [QUOTE]Ah, but there's still more! As you know, the Jews have not always been leftists, or communists, or race-mixers, or Trotskyite anti-Stalinists. Perhaps before they were all these things (which "caused" the anti-Semites to hate them) they were all right? Not at all! Because even though they were none of these things--not one of them--in medieval Europe, they nevertheless "subverted" chrstian civilization. How? By being "Talmudists." Before that they perpetrated animal sacrifices. In the later middle ages they were capitalists. Then they were all those other things, each one of which "subverted" civilization and "caused" the Jew-haters to hate them! And tomorrow a Jew will doubtless subvert chrstian civilization by using the restroom or by brething or by going to work! In other words, the Jew-haters don't hate the Jews because of anything the Jews do or have ever done. They decide to hate the actions only because Jews do them. Could anything possibly be more "self-evident?" And these smirking maggots throw this blatant hypocrisy, these blatant lies, in our faces and laugh at us . . . and we're supposed to think it's FUNNY????? [/QUOTE]

Ponce

2004-10-02 14:19 | User Profile

Saalam Aleikum to you my brother,,,,,speak for yourself when you say that no one here is pro-Arab, we all must choose sides or we are nothing,,,,and what do you want to be? a pro-Jew??????

I don't see the Arabs atacking the US and serving as spys like the Zionists and the so called American Jews.

I would rather have my 76 virgins (hell, at my age one is plenty) than bang my head against a so called "holy wall".

WesleyWes

2005-02-01 18:14 | User Profile

Hello,

I realise that many are attracted to a socialistic critique of everything from the ill-named Patriot Act to the wars, past present and future in the East. Simply because a Americanist critique is not noticable, one has to look for one. On newsstands you will find plenty of socialist press, penty of 'main-stream' waiste of trees and the like. Its unfortunate that many also are venturing into the Libertarian Party thang and its philosophy wich to me leads to the erosion of Nation States and a faith in the global freedom by the virtue of Corporations. Whos more Old Line, Patrick Buchanon or Ron Paul? And when one gets notice it is no doubt that Catholic Buchanon.

Thankyou, Wesley Mcgranor Founder [url]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Anti-Catholic[/url] :thumbsup:

WesleyWes

2005-10-25 23:10 | User Profile

Hello,

A couple things, I am aware that many in previous intelectual ranks of neo-conservatism were Jewish. However to me it has a strong Catholic foundation. And also i dont see how being a Noahide would make you automatically a Zionist and a member od tha A.D.L.

Peace!