General Stuff – Page 27 – Expel The Parasite

Thoughts on the 9-11 No Plane Theory & “Everything’s Completely Fake” Idea.

Let’s get something straight here to start with: I am no expert in the field of media fakery or Psyops. The point of writing this piece is to put out a few open questions and general commentary on the whole issue.

After listening to John Friend’s last few radio shows on the media fakery/Psyop topic, I’ve come up with a few points which need to be raised.

If no planes flew into the Twin Towers on 9-11, and pretty much the whole event were faked, then why would the following have happened?

Jews controlled all the airport security. ICTS International, an Israeli company ran all three airports where the alleged hijackings occurred. Most ICTS employees were probably Mossad (foreign) agents, and therefore immune to lawsuits according to the Patriot Act. We know the Jews control the US government, so why would they bother ensuring legal immunity for an Israeli security company if there was nothing for ICTS to hide in the first place, i.e. No planes involved in the 9-11 plot?

The Gomel Chesed Cemetery Incident. In this event, a retired IDF officer overheard a couple of Jews speaking in Hebrew. At the end of their otherwise normal conversation, one man said, “The Americans will learn what it is to live with terrorists after the planes hit the twins in September.”

Odigo Instant Messaging. Israelis were forewarned 2 hours before the attacks took place. If there were no victims and they were all made up, then why would the Israelis (of all people) be concerned that their citizens would be killed, especially considering that the Jews were running the whole operation? Jews forewarned, and not the Goyim. Sounds about right.

Everyone who worked in the Twin Towers must have been told to stay away that day. That is, if there were no victims of course. Once again, no need for Odigo to warn the Israelis who would have already known, just like everyone else working there. This means everyone working there was in on the hoax, and now they are all just keeping quiet.

Goldman Sachs forewarning on September 10^th. Tokyo branches warned employees to stay away from Twin Towers. Once again, Jews being warned to stay away. ‘Just let the Goy go to work on the 11^th’, Oy Vey!

National Security systems were running on P-Tech, with Jew Michael S. Goff as marketing manager. P-Techs software was responsible for sending Jets in the event of Hijackings etc. Why bother having this Jew in a position of power over vital system software if no planes were going to be used? (He was a lawyer and made a sudden ‘sayanim-style’ shift over to P-Tech to do his bit for the Jewish cause)

Dov Zakheim ran Systems Planning Corporation which specialised in remote control technology for planes (of all things). Undersecretary of Defence at the time, and a big-shot at the Pentagon, this is all too convenient for someone looking to hijack a plane or two and steer them into a couple of towers!

Ken Feinberg ran a victims compensation fund of $7 billion. 97% of victims’ families took the money and waived their right to demand a real investigation into 9-11. Why bother with a compensation fund if there were no real victims?

That is a basic summary of the essential points in Missing Links which shows how planes and victims seem to be a pretty obvious part of the plot. (I used ZCF’s written summary of Mike Delaney’s work, in case you can’t tell. ZCF will hate me for it, haha!)

To put it simply, if you believe in the ‘No Planes Theory’ and that there were no victims on 9-11, then did anything happen at all? Did any crime take place? What you are left with is nothing more than a bunch of Jews demolishing two empty buildings. If this scenario is true, then the Jews are guilty of nothing more than an extremely well executed deception. No crime at all. This is why I believe they promote these theories in the alternative media. It acquits the Jews of any criminal activity!

Another thing to note with documentaries like September Clues, is that they use video footage to ‘prove’ that the ‘planes hitting the towers’ story is fake. Ok, so you readily acknowledge how easy it is to make fake video footage for a staged event (just like a movie), but on the other hand you put your trust and belief in the makers of a documentary, such as September Clues. How do you know that they are not tampering with any of the video footage which they claim is original? When the argument boils down to video versus video, you are taking the word of whoever it is that’s telling you that the video in question is authentic. It just depends on whether you think the planes hitting the towers is real or fake. If it is real, then the Jews are guilty of committing a great crime, and deserved to be condemned and preferably hung as well. If it is fake, then the Jews are innocent, and deserve nothing more than a smack on the bum for playing naughty tricks on the Goy!

I can’t absolutely say for sure either way, but my gut feeling is that the event was real, the planes hit the towers, and there were a fair few victims. Maybe they played with the numbers a bit, that wouldn’t surprise me, especially focusing on raising the number of Israelis killed to divert attention from their prior knowledge.

However, with much smaller case scenarios like the Sandy Hook shooting, I think it is entirely possible that they could have faked the whole thing. These school shootings, and the like, do smell very fishy when you do any investigating. But, like I say, I’m not an expert on these Psyops and media fakery. This article is just my two cents of thought on the subject. Nothing more, nothing less. Take it for what it’s worth.

I’d just like to say in closing that this is in no way an attack on John Friend, who I consider a good man and a friend. I just see these ‘media fakery’ and 9-11 ‘no plane theories’ as a way for the Jews to get the believer to dismiss the evidence which condemns criminal Jewry. In the case of 9-11, if you believe there were no planes and no victims, then no crime took place, and the one documentary (Missing Links) proving who did it, becomes worthless and void. (I’ve become more convinced of this fact since I began writing this article)

John Friend has done some great work investigating the Psyop aspect of many important events, and I agree with him, up to a point. I don’t deny that Psyops are real. I just think that the Jews have ways of taking real things, such as psychological operations and media fakery, and twisting them way too far into the realms of hocus-pocus and bizarre mumbo-jumbo.

Make up your own mind.

– BDL1983

Legally Brown Australia?

Listen up White Australians, and every other member of the White Race around the world. This is no fucking joke. The future of our race, and our very genetic existence is at stake.

Take a look at this short trailer clip for a new show called ‘Legally Brown‘ on SBS TV, Australia:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0o1bW61eNsc&w=640&h=360]

Not included in this clip, but in the SBS advert for the show, is a bit where the ‘coloured‘ host says something along the lines of:

“I can’t wait until Australia’s national pastime is making fun of White people”

And while poking at the eyes of a white doll, he says to a White person on the street, something like:

“Just look at him. Does he represent the typical Australian, with his beady, racist, blue eyes?”

It goes something like that anyway (I’m only going from the top of my head here). It’s a situation where if the races were switched, there would be a national, no, international outrage overnight, about the evil White racists on TV.

So Whitey, do you really feel like being the butt of the joke in the country your ancestors built? Should you stand for that? National humiliation from a bunch of mud parasites sent here by the JEW to destroy your genetic right to exist? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill? Nope. I’m highlighting the sort of stuff which will continue to flood the mainstream Jew TV propaganda machine, until we virtually cease to exist. It’s not a joke. This is why they are allowing the muds to swarm in, RIGHT NOW! It’s to get rid of you, Whitey, from existing in any place on the face of the earth. We have nowhere left to turn because all our countries are being flooded with coloured invaders. No-ones flooding all the coloured shithole nations. Nope. It’s only our White nations which are being systematically destroyed by the Jewish Multiculti machine.

Regarding the TV show: What a fucking load of shit! This is what we are supposed to uphold as ‘Australian culture’? Fuck off! I’m fucking angry, and I’ve had enough of all this bullshit that people watch on TV. It is all fucking crap, and a complete waste of time. You may as well be dead if all you plan on doing is watching the fucking TV while your race DIES!

Fuck the Jews, and all the coloured swarms who wish to deny our White Race the right to survive and live freely in our own territories, that WE CONQUERED! As for the ‘Multiculti Do-Gooder Whites’, I hope the Jews DESTROY you too, because YOU deserve it!

To deny our right to existence, AS A RACE, is GENOCIDE by definition, according to the United Nations. (The UN’s run by Jews, so forget that, I was only illustrating the point)

My RIGHT to pen these thoughts are also protected under Article 19 of the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. So FUCK YOU if you are offended!

Article 19: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

It’s time to STAND UP AND FIGHT FOR WHAT WE KNOW IS RIGHT!

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yauSm_iIL6g&w=640&h=360]

He certainly was right.

– ANGRY BDL1983

Thought For The Day:

The Jewish response to the fact that we are right.

There would be no need for it otherwise……….

– BDL1983

On the Supreme Importance of Æsthetics

Buffalo Jenkins
Daily Stormer
October 22, 2013

The Aryan racial soul strives for beauty.

The first and most sweeping swindle perpetrated upon the west by its enemies was the obfuscation of the definition of Art. Starting with Kandinsky’s ‘Expressionism’ and bolstered by Clement Greenburg’s ‘Artspeak’ criticism, this new abstract creativity overwhelmed all tradition in art. Swept away in this nihilist flood were traditional art tutelage,inherited skills dating back to prehistory, high culture, good taste, standards or hierarchy in art, naturalism, symmetry, decoration, technical merit, self-determination and ‘becoming’ in art. Styles in painting, sculpture, architecture that had evolved from European antiquity came to a crashing halt on the pages of Judaic ‘art theory’ criticism – a ridiculous construct of universalism that tried (successfully!) to embrace pure abstraction as progressivism in art.

Irony became in vogue. Random splatters of paint, intentionally awkward and ugly forms, childish primitivism became intellectual culture, via reams of this irrational wordsmithing. True progress was hijacked and perverted by cultural Marxism. This later would be the same brand of relativism they found could be successfully applied to all aspects of western tradition and taste, beyond just the false edifying of abstraction as intellectualism, but as a means of attacking every aspect of European culture. The self-eating snake, wracked with guilt, wallowing in weakness and trembling with pity. Their success in art criticism and art theory not only paved the way for total degradation, but the ongoing artlessness of our western world remains and enormous obstacle in allowing us to rediscover our true self-becoming.

Today we have ‘conceptualism’ and ‘abstract expressionism’ ruling our art academies – one may take a lazy preamble into any ‘modern art’ gallery to see what kind of mindless, indefinable childishness this results in. Literal piles of garbage, arranged sex dolls, people standing in animal suits, you may find pretty much anything other than, ironically, actual art. Many voluminous rants about the imagined merits of this perpetual stream of anti-art are printed and spoken of in modern art academies and critical literature. But not a word of it amounts to anything more than liberal guilt, juvenile self-hate, and profuse obsession with human failings and perversions.

Nothing that smacks of beauty, positivity or self-affirmation can fall under this new modernist art definition. All serves to remind us that grandeur is an illusion, human affairs are nihilistically limited, and we are not worth saving. We deserve ugly, lascivious paintings rendered childishly – they are an attack against elitism! But this view is a construct, relying upon egalitarian tropes that are as evil and false as a lie can be. True art is not the all-encompassing cloud of pure creativity where permissiveness enshrines the freedom to announce anything you desire as art. Modernity exists upon a platform of hating true art, or all art before modernism, which they couch in snide blanket terms like ‘realism.’

There is no foundation for modern art abstraction other than proving that the public will accept whatever you tell them to accept. After all the long years of Pollock’s and Picasso’s and Duchamp’s, a cursory Googling of contemporary art definitions lays bare this bizarre and poisonous foundation. A definition of abstract expressionism reveals its basis is ‘A school of painting that flourished after World War II until the early 1960’s, characterized by the view that art is nonrepresentational and chiefly improvisational.’ If this revelation about art is true, that means that Michelangelo, Raphael, Phidias, Sargeant, Turner, Reubens, Titian, DaVinci, and every artist before this movement were completely wasting their time actually learning the craft of painting or sculpture or architecture. They should have been practicing random improvisation, freeing themselves of talent and technical prowess. They should have been splashing paint about like the moronic Pollock, or painting three stripes endlessly like the Judaic con Rothko. The average person assumes that public art comes to them courtesy of respected, talented academics and institutions devoted to furthering and bettering society. They can not fathom or assume that our art ethos is an enormous lie eroding western civilization with hubris and hatred.

This is not art. It is an act of violence against the soul.

Modern art cannot exist in the same world as traditional art. Modern art can exist only as a hate-filled backlash against the superiority of that which came before it. If something appears to have no point should one dig deeper until a point manifests? Does it not remain ultimately pointless?

Modern art criticism, from the likes of Clement Greenburg, is the only truly creative aspect of modern art. He pioneered the style of criticism that found praise in the willfully ‘nonrepresentational’. This opened the floodgates to endless reams of eloquent bloviate about ‘redefining art preconceptions’ and all the typical modernist buzz words we’ve come to associate with generic attacks on western values. Vagaries about progressiveness and old ways that are tired and ready for the dustbin of history. Thus, over time, the idea of craftsmanship becomes denigrated – as the painter becomes the illustrator, the true architect a restorer, a traditional fashionista a set designer, and naturalism becomes pastiche. There is a reason that during the Renaissance you didn’t have celebrated artists making random splatters of paint on a canvas in the Uffizi – that is because it is stupid. It is patently on it’s face idiotic. Because a child really could do it. Turner or Rembrandt did not have to compete in the creative arena with a Tracy Emin type character who traipses around confidently arranging mannequins or unmade beds and touting it as art because it is ‘pushing boundaries.’ That is because it takes a society existing, as we do, at a sustained level of luxurious stupidity to even imagine philosophizing such obvious lies.

Read More

This is a great post. I’ve always hated modern art, even before I knew about the Jew…… I must have good instincts! Now I know why I hated it.

– Brett

Female Model turns into Justin Bieber

From this:

To this:

This is not normal folks!

Before and After:

This article from the Huffington Post explains her ‘gender-bending’:

While she did lose her womenswear clients after switching over to male modeling, Sailors discovered that she could extend her career in this new gender role, rather than try to extend her tenure in the youth-obsessed female modeling world. “In the industry, females are expected to look younger longer than males are,” she said. “And I knew I was getting older.” Once she committed, she chopped off her long hair into a masculine haircut and hoped for the best, understanding that she would certainly take a pay cut as a male model (per the industry standard).

“I’ve never identified as a male, but I’ve always described myself as a guy,” she told HuffPost Live, explaining that the career shift is not just a “phase.” Thanks to gender-bending models like Andrej Pejić, who Sailor considers a “total inspiration,” and Casey Legler, another female model who exclusively models menswear, it seems that Sailor is contributing to a growing industry-wide conversation about self-expression and the roles of men and women in fashion.

Read more and watch video

This sure is weird stuff.

Why, oh why, would a model who looks beautiful and natural as a FEMALE, want to do this to herself? She looks about as masculine as one of those Justin Bieber, One Direction types of teenage fags, that the Jew-controlled music industry loves to promote! She doesn’t have manly features, so why bother turning her into a ‘little boy’? It’s just sick and fucked up; all this ‘gender-bending‘. If the fashion Jews over there in Jew York really need more male models, then why not find a MALE for the Job? Oh no, that would make sense. “Better offer it to a female, so we can promote ‘gender-benders’ as somehow normal”

This is the sort of stuff promoted ALL OVER THE TV these days. We truly do live in ‘enlightened‘ times………..

– BDL1983