Sunday, August 12, 2012
"The best way to overcome the opposition is by leading it." - Lenin
While liberals can go to bed at night knowing their cause and its leaders are every bit as irrational as they could dream, conservatives today have a real problem: phony conservatives. The pseudo-conservatives are a rat like breed more devious than even hardcore commies. With communists you more or less know what you're getting, where they're coming from and who you're dealing with. Communists seem genuinely devoted to the triumph of their cause - evil as it is. But phony conservatives are like officers who lead their troops into defeat. And the defeats are calculated and deliberate.
Why would anyone lead their own troops into defeat? In my opinion there are just three options: they're secretly working for the other side. They've been paid to do so; and/or they've been blackmailed to do so.
The outrage that many decent people feel regarding the depradations of leftism in their countries and communities caused a counter movement. But movements need leaders. While there've been many sincere and honest people who've committed themselves to the cause of Euro/American traditions and morals, there's not a lot of money in it. Western civilization, where the war against reality is mainly being fought, is drenched to the skin with the false ideals of liberalism. But big liberals get big money. Big liberals are lionized by other liberals. They get good press in the liberal media and their misdeeds are explained away or swept under the rug. Their virtues, few as they are, get amplified beyond the auditory pain threshold.
Conservativism by nature is not energetic. Conservatism doesn't work to change the existing world order. Think of conservatism as being a lot like a team on defense, concerned less about scoring than about preventing the other team from scoring. But liberalism is offensive and wants to score... any way possible! Liberalism is about change. Liberalism is about winning. There is no such thing as fair play in the minds of liberals. However, conservatives play to tie. Conservatism is not about winning - it's about not losing. Thus we see two very different mind types at work.
Odd as it may seem, the rulers of the world, despite all their advantages, are still worried by conservatism. Finding themselves resisted by what basically amounts to a cluster of angry peasants armed with staves and pitchforks, they nervously shunned battle. Instead, they came up with the idea of subverting the peasants by infiltrating "leaders" who would lead them off in wrong directions: neoconservatives! The fruits of this strategy are all around us. Some of these phony neoconservative leaders were and are: George Bush (both of them), Donald Rumsfeld, Leo Strauss, Irving Kristol, William Kristol, Richard Perle, Norman Podhoretz, William F. Buckley, John McCain, Jean Kirkpatrick, Mitt Romney, Joseph Lieberman, George Will, Paul Wolfowitz, the Koch brothers, David Horowitz, Rush Limbaugh, John Hagee, Michael Savage, Pope Benedict XVI.... One could go on a long time.
Here I want to make two points: 1. Neocons are NOT conservatives. Neocons are ziocons: war mongering Zionists. 2. Neocons want an expansively powerful state - just like the liberals! This isn't too unexpected a revelation: neoconservatism, just like liberalism, has from the start been a false front operation of organized Jewry.
Researching neoconservatism one quickly finds that many of its leading lights were and are Jewish. Furthermore many, if not all, of these Jews started out as campus commies back in the 40's, 50's and 60's. So what happened? Here's a theory: finding greater than expected resistance among the common folk to its world grabbing madness, International Jewry settled on the idea of taking control of the opposition. There's an old Yiddish proverb, "Turn the head and the ass follows." That'd describe the present situation accurately. Bona fide conservative groups suddenly found themselves the objects of favorable attention and generous funding - IF they'd consent to certain people being placed in power positions. These people were often Jews. Jews who had only a few years earlier been spouting the maxims of Marx in a thousand college classrooms. Thus Jewry got its nose into the conservative tent - with the rest of the camel soon to follow.
As can be seen by the names of those involved, not all neocons are Jews, but a hell of a lot of them are. And Jew or not, the neocons are all very, very fond of Israel. In fact this deranged adoration for Israel can be seen as their most distinctive feature.
Today it isn't at all unusual to hear neoconservative leaders chanting pretty much the same mantra as their (supposed) liberal arch-rivals: "women's rights", "freedom and democracy", "gay rights", "multiculturalism", "unity in diversity"... ad nauseum, ad infinitum.... Why? Because both factions are puppets of International Jewry. It's as simple as that! There are genuine differences between the street rank and file, but the leadership is all taking the same bus.
When donating any of your hard earned to a claimed "conservative" cause, you have to be very prudent these days. Many of the newly birthed "conservative" groups are actually fronts, run by and for Jewry, with the two-fold purpose of: 1. Getting your money - some of which they pocket themselves and some they use to advance Jewry's serpentine agenda. 2. Weakening bona fide conservative groups by siphoning off money that would have gone to them. Some of these Jew run groups even masquerade as anti-Zionist!
Rather than send your $$$ to a plethora of pseudo-cons begging for donations, some of whom are fronts for Zionism and the Jew World Order, it's better to send to only a few people or groups you KNOW are genuine. This may involve some homework for you - to make sure your $$$ is going to worthy recipients. But do you really want to send your money to people who will then turn around and use it to forge your chains?
Political neoconservatism has found an ally in the so-called religious right. Once again, the old strategy of turning the head of the ass is employed. Charismatic religious (mis)leaders who can be counted on to say the right things soon find themselves enjoying life in a lavishly funded lime light. Pat Robertson, John Hagee, Benny Hinn, Robert Tilton, Kenneth Copeland, Jesse Jackson, Joyce Meyer, Al Sharpton, Joel Osteen, Pope Benedict XVI....
The Pope is in something of another category, but like the others he knows he'd damn well better worship the great toe of Israel if he knows what's good for him. The current Pope has made a career of subverting the Catholic faith. His most spectacular deception is getting people to think he's a traditionalist, when in fact he's a traitor. If B16's not a Freemason, which is forbidden to Catholics, he's certainly given a convincing impression of being one. In any event the masons don't seem to mind him much (btw, Freemasonry is another Jewish front group).
A few years back I stumbled upon an abysmal site called "Holy Smoke", moderated by a foofy Englishman named Damian Thompson. Holy Smoke pretends to advocate a traditional Catholic world view. I was pleasantly surprised, at first, to find other people who seemed to share my views about the sad state of things in the post Vatican II Church. But I quickly began to sense a certain irrationality. Most of the regulars seemed to think that B16 is a staunch conservative who's going to clean things up following JPII's disastrous pontificate. JPII for his part was viewed not as not a Church wrecking demoniac but as a well intentioned albeit naive man who found himself surrounded on all sides by liberals in the hierarchy. Perhaps that'd explain why so many leading masons turned up for JPII's funeral - which says volumes about the man for those who can read between the lines.
When I began to push a bit on things like this, I became the focus of a certain hostility. When I said some things regarding queers a swell of denunciation descended upon me. But when I quoted POPES AND SAINTS regarding the Jews, the screeching could be heard in outer space! For quoting popes and saints! In fact they even denounced me for quoting Jews... verbatim!
It took a while but I finally realized that most of those posting at Blowing Smoke were either Jews pretending to be Catholics; or they were goyim shmucks who'd been brainwashed by the BBC - which is of course operated lock stock and barrel by and for Jewry.
Thompson and his site are what is called "neoCatholic". NeoCatholicism, like neoconservatism, is a false front operation. A new customer walks in thinking he's in a toy store but on looking more closely discovers he's actually in a porn shop. That's neoCatholicism in a nutshell. Phony traditional Catholics are out and about in large numbers. The way to tell them from genuine traditional Catholics is to do like I did: mention queers and/or Jews unfavorably. If you're attacked then those you're talking to are phony traditionalists. REAL Catholics know the score about fags and the Jews.
While it seems unlikely, even incredible, and both sides would deny it vehemently, very little philosophical distance separates the liberal from the neocon. Both want an expanded state (with themselves at the levers). It's just a case of "welfare statism" vs "warfare statism" - and which is the more expedient way for the elite to achieve their power hungry ends. I've debated with both types at length and learned that the same arguments work on both. They're not at opposite ends of the spectrum as some might think. They're on the same end - and the honest person is at the other.
So, here's my take: libs and neocons are both lemmings. Just different species of lemmings. And Jewry plays pied piper to them both. But at the end of the day they're all hurrying toward the same abyss.