2179 replies to this topic

[PRCD: Death (and Taxes)]

In this thread, we discover new ways in which the Jews are harmful.

[PRCD: Death (and Taxes)]

PMAN said I needed to beef up the OP, so here it goes

I was late to the game in figuring out how much the Jews were involved in supporting Bolshevism (and getting a lot of people killed).  Neoconservatism began as a Jewish response to Trotskyism, which was also a Jewish movement.  Both neoconservatism and Trotskyism have resulted in needless deaths and maimings of mostly humans.  It is becoming increasingly difficult to keep track of the dizzying array of harmful Jewish movements in existence.

Recently, the Tribe has been particularly active in the area of feminism, which has a most obvious explanation.  Says Roissy,
http://roissy.wordpr...beta-providers/

Quote

Hanna Rosin wrote a stream of consciousness diatribe against men in The Atlantic recently called "The End of Men". As with most of these articles written by foot soldiers of the femborg collective lamenting — or celebrating, if the tone is any indication — the regression of men into second and third class status in American society, evidence for certain assertions is woefully lacking, and where the authors uncover something truthful about the condition of modern men, they only paint half a picture because of their refusal, out of ignorance or deceptiveness, to confront the full reality of the sexual market; in particular, female hypergamy. Without grasping the very different compulsions that animate men's and women's sexual drives, one will never have a clear understanding of male-female relations and cultural trends.

The origins of Hanna Rosin's feminism are obvious, even to the most casual observer.  I mean, look at her: [img]http://hkaward.files...-photo.jpg[/img] Even a Jewish photographer failed to find a flattering angle for this beady-eyed Jewess.  

In fairness, if I looked like Hanna Rosin and married a gay man like she did (more on this later), I'd probably be a feminist too. I think Sailer's law of female journalism applies here, to wit, "The most heartfelt articles by female journalists tend to be demands that social values be overturned in order that, Come the Revolution, the journalist herself will be considered hotter-looking."  

In this article, Rosin quite literally attacks the notion of breastfeeding.  The subtext here is again obvious.  She, being ugly, had to get back to work to provide for her beta husband and family after her pregnancies. Hotter women find richer men and don't have to do the same. Social mores must be overturned such that, Come the Revolution, Rosin will be found more desirable.  
http://www.theatlant...t-feeding/7311/

Lastly, here she is with her family arguing over which gender is superior.  This is behavior you'd expect from kindergartners on the playground, but not from adults and you certianly wouldn't expect the same adults to cultivate gender animosity in their children, but this is precisely what the hook-nosed Rosin does:
http://www.theatlant...han-boys/57552/
Note that the son is the only man in the family and that the husband, David Plotkin, is extremely effeminate owing possibly to his hen-pecked upbringing at the hands of an equally-obnoxious Jewish mother.  Note also that Plotkin doesn't even demand that his lovely wife take his last name.  The glory has surely departed from this temple.

This week, yet another closeted Jewish male takes up the standard of Jewish feminism perhaps because he simply doesn't know any better.  Jewish men - or what passes for them - are probably so demoralized by their harpy-women that they simply don't know up from down at this point.  I feel a mixture of pity and revulsion towards them:
http://roissy.wordpr...s-perfect-beta/

Jewish women co-opted 2nd and 3rd wave feminism because of their low status in the sexual market. Take a look through some of the pictures of these Jewish beauties, for instance. It was impossible for them to compete with much-prettier-on-average human WASP women on looks and personality alone, so they needed a Revolution that made them look hotter (corrolary to Sailer's law).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism
http://en.wikipedia....ewish_feminists

Feminism is for the "have-nots" amongst women in terms of looks and personality and for the hen-pecked beta clingers-on who aid them.

As with Bolshevism, I was late to the game in apprehending Jewish involvement in feminism.  But I suspect that many more Jewish movements exist that, at the very least, poison the human well.  In this thread we shall attempt to expose them.

Edited by PRCalDude, 20 June 2010 - 09:01 PM.

[PLEASUREMAN]

excellent post

one of the omissions that MacDonald offers a huge correction for is that Jews were at the center of the social upheaval that happened in the 20th century...and I mean right at the center, laying the groundwork, putting in the time, recruiting the soldiers, everything from forming the NAACP to changing immigration law to pushing anti-science movements in academia

it sounds like a big fat conspiracy theory of the sort clung to by bitter white nationalists, but anyone with sufficient education knows it is pretty much true--the 20th century was the story of WASPs standing by and doing very little while Jews supplanted their customs and ideology with Jewish-friendly customs and ideology

and the results speak for themselves--WASP institutions and social structure crumbled, social pathology among European-derived peoples rose, whites found themselves disadvantaged by the new multicultural order, and at every point Jews either saw no change or a dramatic improvement in their circumstances (and certainly a relative improvement)

Hannah Rosin is, like most Jewish women, ugly as sin--a great argument for giving the burka a second look, and I think when you look at the rise of intellectual movements it always pays to keep your focus on the primal motives, because they're the ones that endure long after people have forgotten the complicated intellectual arguments...feminism was driven in part by the hate Jewish women felt for the human housewife and her satisfied human husband (of course there were other factors at play, including scale)

at some point you have to accept that the intelligentsia we suffer under is lousy with Jews, and a discussion of our condition becomes impossible without addressing their differences and tendencies...of course Roissy works in DC so the choice is pretty clear for him, not really a choice at all as he marinades in Jewish thinking from dawn to dusk, and likely has forgotten what it is like to live in any other circumstance

[PLEASUREMAN]

I couldn't pass this up from one of Roissy's Jew commenters:

Quote

To add:

"What is also interesting is that I doubt anything like this would fly in Israel, where the guys act like complete chauvinist a-holes."

I know the Judenhass here love to complain about how Jews want to undermine the West through unfettered immigration, while keeping Israel ethnically Jewish.

But how do you explain all the leftist Jews who couldn't give a s**t about Israel and for all intent and purpose line up with the Palestinians?

Your theories only work when you ignore contrary evidence.

Jews are in love with the seeming (but not real) contradiction.  Of course the argument is that Jews are compelled by nature (formed by culture, IQ, ethnic tradition) to attack the institutions of the host culture.  It's pretty obvious how Leftist Jews fit in here, even though they don't technically agitate for the right to bulldoze ragheads.  It's really just a rather basic difference of opinion as to best strategy--work to fortify Zion at all costs, or focus on dissolving the majority cohesion in their home away from home.  MacDonald also documented how supposedly "secular" Jews found their religion and ethnic affinity when it really mattered, and maintained their prerogative to live aloof from humans while preaching universalism.

[PRCD: Death (and Taxes)]

One hesitates to tarry long on the subject of the Jews because it's easy to come off as a wild-eyed loon, but the Jewish attack on 20th century WASP institutions parallels their many (often fatal) stick-pokings of human leviathans throughout history.

http://www.amazon.co...e/dp/0226296660

This has been going on since at least the time of Jesus.  Recall that they provoked the Romans into leveling Jerusalem in 70 AD when yet another falsen Jewish messiah came along leading a military rebellion.   One can't help but notice their provocation of both the Muslim and Christian worlds today, despite their miniscule numbers.  They're like the wimpy obnoxious kid who runs out of parents to shelter them from the bigger boys they've antagonized.

[PRCD: Death (and Taxes)]

PLEASUREMAN, on 20 June 2010 - 09:10 PM, said:

I couldn't pass this up from one of Roissy's Jew commenters:

Quote

To add:

"What is also interesting is that I doubt anything like this would fly in Israel, where the guys act like complete chauvinist a-holes."

I know the Judenhass here love to complain about how Jews want to undermine the West through unfettered immigration, while keeping Israel ethnically Jewish.

But how do you explain all the leftist Jews who couldn't give a s**t about Israel and for all intent and purpose line up with the Palestinians?

Your theories only work when you ignore contrary evidence.

Jews are in love with the seeming (but not real) contradiction.  Of course the argument is that Jews are compelled by nature (formed by culture, IQ, ethnic tradition) to attack the institutions of the host culture.  It's pretty obvious how Leftist Jews fit in here, even though they don't technically agitate for the right to bulldoze ragheads.  It's really just a rather basic difference of opinion as to best strategy--work to fortify Zion at all costs, or focus on dissolving the majority cohesion in their home away from home.  MacDonald of course also documented how supposedly "secular" Jews found their religion and ethnic affinity when it really mattered, and maintained their prerogative to live aloof from humans while preaching universalism.

Where is the evidence for what this commenter claims?  Where are these leftist Jews (redundant) who side with the Palis?  As soon as the topic of Israel comes up, Jews swing to the right of Ghenghis Khan.  Sure, there's guys like Barney FRank who dispense squid ink about being "ashamed" about the recent flotilla attacks and what-not, but what about the rest of Israel's policies?  What about AIPAC's and the neoconservatives' stranghold on foreign policy in the Middle East and their stranglehold on what constitutes acceptable speech about Jews and Israel?  

I've seen "lefty" Jews get into shouting matches with Muslims from the Muslim Students Association at my Alma Mater.  Their right to be rabidly ethhnocentric is really the only thing they'll grow a spine for.

[PLEASUREMAN]

No there are quite a few leftist Jews who criticize Israel.  Most famously Noam Chomsky, but also people like Eric Alterman, and actually if you survey Jews you find a greater diversity of attitudes than you see in the mainstream media...but you will see this criticism mainly in hard left publications, certainly not on the news networks except as a wacky viewpoint A for the host to shoot down

[Bonerjit]

The student radical movements that erupted across college campuses during the 60s were heavily Jewish.

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Rudd"]Mark Rudd[/url] (born Rudnitsky) was a Jewish student at Columbia University and the leader of Columbia's chapter of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Students_for_a_Democratic_Society_%281960_organization%29"]Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)[/url], which was one of the major radical groups in the 60s.  

In 1968, Rudd and the SDS led a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_University_protests_of_1968"]violent student revolt at Columbia[/url] and took over and occupied many university buildings, clashed with the NYPD, and disrupted the campus for 6 weeks.  They achieved two of their stated goals for the revolt: Columbia University disaffiliated itself with a military research think-tank that had ties with the Dept. of Defense, and the university scrapped plans to build a gym that the students argued would have been racist.

Rudd gave a talk in 2005 discussing his experience as a young radical titled, "Why were there so many Jews in SDS? (or, The Ordeal of Civility)."

As the title suggests, Rudd is fully aware of the major Jewish role and involvement in the radical movements of the 60s.  

http://www.markrudd.com/?about-mark-rudd/why-were-there-so-many-jews-in-sds-or-the-ordeal-of-civility.html

[quote][quote]I've been thinking about this subject for a long time, almost forty years, so I want to begin by thanking the New Mexico Jewish Historical Society for giving me this opportunity to organize my ideas. I first spoke publicly about the question in 1988 at the twentieth anniversary celebration of the Columbia strike. In a rambling 45 minute monologue I touched on a lot of subjects, but the only one people seemed to respond to was my recognition of our Jewish backgrounds as relevant to our opposition to the war and racism. That was during a mini-revival of Judaism and Jewish culture which took place among the not so new New Leftists in the 80's. With the death of the socialist dream we were all searching for direction at the time. Unfortunately, I haven't pursued the subject until now, but I do believe that the revolt of Jewish youth in the New Left of the sixties and seventies deserves to be studied and honored as an important chapter in the history of American Jews.

Before beginning to write, I checked out the subject on the internet. Googling the words "Jews and SDS," the number two site that popped up was a page from "Jew Watch," which monitors the ZOG, that is the Zionist Occupation Government of the United States. The piece was called, "How the Jews Controlled the New Left of the 1960's." Reading down, I found some decent scholarly references concerning the numerical preponderance of Jewish leaders and rank-and-file members of the New Left and SDS, at least until the late 1960's. But at one point, with no warning, the anonymous author suddenly flips into analysis mode with this paragraph:

[...]

Anonymous anti-semites aside, the numbers on Jews in SDS are clear. The author Paul Berman, himself a Jewish veteran of Columbia SDS, in his excellent book, "A Tale of Two Utopias," gives the following data from reliable sources: two-thirds of the white Freedom Riders who traveled to Mississippi were Jewish; a majority of the steering committee of the 1964 Berkeley Free Speech Movement were Jewish; the SDS chapters at Columbia and the University of Michigan were more than half Jewish; at Kent State in Ohio, where only 5 percent of the student body was Jewish, Jews constituted 19 percent of the chapter. I might add a strange statistic which I became aware of in the course of two trips to Kent State to commemorate the events of May, 1970: three of the four students shot by the National Guard at Kent State were Jewish. This, of course, defies all odds.

There are at least two good ways to pursue the question of why there were so many Jews in SDS. The first would be a sociological research study in which a large representative sample of the Jewish veterans of SDS and the New Left are asked about the relationship between their being Jewish and their activism. The responses would be classified and quantified. I hope somebody does this, if it hasn't already been done. The second approach, ethnographic case study, is the one I propose to pursue. And, surprise, the case study will be myself, as representative of the cohort.

[...]

I invoke Roth to let you in on the insularity of the world I grew up in. My family carried the Jewish ghettos of Newark and Elizabeth with them to the suburbs. We may have lived in integrated neighborhoods, that is integrated with goyim (there were only a few blacks in the town) and we may have gone to integrated schools, (of course there were no blacks in my elementary school) but we were far from assimilated, if that means replacing a Jewish identity with an American one. At about the age of nine or ten I remember eating lunch at the house of a non-Jewish friend and reporting back that the hamburgers had onion and parsley in them. "Oh, that's goyish hamburger," my mother said. I lived a Philip Roth existence in which the distinction between Jews and humans was present in all things: having dogs and cats was goyish, for example, as was a church-sponsored hay-ride which I was invited to by the cute red-haired girl who sat in front of me in my seventh grade home-room. My parents didn't allow me to go, and, since repression breeds resistance, that was probably a signal event in my career of fascination with shiksas and things goyish, a career which paralleled that of young Alexander Portnoy in "Portnoy's Complaint."

[...]
[/quote]

[Bonerjit]

More excerpts from Mark Rudd's talk, "Why were there so many Jews in SDS? (or, The Ordeal of Civility)."

Quote

I got to Columbia University as a freshman, age 18, in September, 1965, a few months after the United States attacked Vietnam with main force troops. There I found a small but vibrant anti-war movement. In my first semester I was recruited by David Gilbert, a senior who had written a pamphlet on imperialism for national SDS, Students for a Democratic Society. David was one of the founders of the Columbia SDS chapter, along with John Fuerst, the chapter Chairman. Both were Jewish, of course, as were my mentors and friends, Michael Josefowicz, Harvey Blume, Michael Neumann, and John Jacobs. Ted Kaptchuk and Ted Gold were Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Columbia SDS the year before I was elected Chairman, along with my Vice-Chairman, Nick Freudenberg. All of us were Jewish. It's hard to remember the names of non-Jewish Columbia SDS'ers; it was as much a Jewish fraternity as Sammie. There were probably a greater proportion of human women than guys in SDS, and of course I got to know them.

Out of all the uncountable hours of discussion in SDS meetings, at the West End Bar over beer, and in our dorm rooms and apartments over joints, I don't remember one single conversation in which we discussed the fact that so many of us were Jewish. This glaring lack alone might serve as a clue to what we were up to: by being radicals we thought we could escape our Jewishness. Left-wing radicalism was internationalist, not narrow nationalist; it favored the oppressed and the workers, not the privileged and elites, which our families were striving toward. Moreover, we were New Leftists, having rejected the sectarianism and cant of the Old Left, which, of course was dominated by Jews.

My friends in SDS taught me, quite correctly, that the world was in revolt against U.S. domination. That was why the Vietnamese were fighting so hard. I learned to admire the Vietnamese and the Cubans and the Chinese and the Russian peasants who had stood up to make a new society. Identifying with the oppressed seemed to me at Columbia and since a natural Jewish value, though one we never spoke of as being Jewish. We were socialists and internationalists first. I myself joined the cult of Che Guevara, putting posters of him on my apartment wall and aching to be a revolutionary hero like him. He wasn't very Jewish, incidentally.

But World War II and the European Baking Championships were our fixed reference points. This was only twenty years after the end of the war. We often talked about the moral imperative to not be Good Germans. Many of my older comrades had mobilized for the civil rights movement; we were all anti-racists. We saw American racism as akin to German racism toward the Jews. As we learned more about the war, we discovered that killing Vietnamese en masse was of no moral consequence to American war planners. So we started describing the war as racist genocide, reflecting the genocide of the European Baking Championships. American imperialist goals around the world were to us little different from the Nazi goal of global conquest. If you really didn't like somebody—and we loathed President Lyndon B. Johnson—you might call him a fascist.

Columbia SDS adopted an intelligent strategy of protesting the war by opposing the university's involvement with it. Over a three year period we exposed the University's claims of being "value-neutral" by pointing to Columbia's Naval ROTC program, its allowing Marine and CIA and Dow Chemical recruiting, and, finally, the defense-oriented research work of the Institute for Defense Analysis consortium, of which Columbia was a leading—and secret—member. Support for the anti-war position among students and faculty gradually grew as the war escalated and as the SDS chapter engaged in continual educational activities and confrontations. The conflict with the university over the war and racism came to a head in the massive rebellion and strike of April-May, 1968.

What outraged me and my comrades so much about Columbia, along with its hypocrisy, was the air of genteel civility. Or should I say human? Despite the presence of so many Jews in the faculty and among the students—geographical distribution in the admissions process had not been effective at filtering us out, our SAT's and class-rank being so high—the place was dripping with goyishness. When I got there freshmen still wore blue blazers and ties and drank sherry at afternoon socials with the deans. At the top of the Columbia heap sat President Grayson Kirk and Vice-President David Truman, two consummate liberal WASP's who privately claimed to oppose the war but maintained the institution's support of it.

In an infamous rabble-rousing speech I made in the course of one the confrontations on campus, I referred to President Grayson Kirk as "that shithead." Certainly I reveled in my role of head barbarian within the gates. But also I wanted to de-throne the President of Columbia University in the minds of my fellow students. It worked.

[Bonerjit]

Mark Rudd's talk, "Why were there so many Jews in SDS? (or, The Ordeal of Civility)," cont.

Quote

More than twenty years ago I read a book called, "The Ordeal of Civility: Freud, Marx, Levi-Strauss and the Jewish Struggle With Modernity." The author, an Irish-American sociologist named John Murray Cuddihy, advances a fascinating theory on the origins of Marxism and Freudianism. Jews were newly emancipated, that is, given legal and political rights, in Western Europe in the mid to late nineteenth century. But even bourgeois Jews were still excluded from civil society by customs and especially by manners. As Jewish (or formerly Jewish) outsiders ostensibly allowed in, but not really, Marx and Freud brought critical eyes to European bourgeois society. Marx said, in effect, "You think you've got yourself a fine little democracy here, well let me tell you about the class exploitation and misery that's underlying it." Similarly, Freud exposed the seamy, sexuality-driven motives, the up-raised penises controlling the unconscious minds of civilized, well-mannered bourgeois society.

We Jews at Columbia—and I would guess at colleges throughout the country—brought the same outsider view to the campuses we had been allowed into. We were peasant children right out of the shtetls of New Jersey and Queens screaming, "You want to know the truth about Columbia University, they're a bunch of liberal imperialists! They claim to be value-neutral but when we asked them to stop their research for the Vietnam War and their racist expansion into the Harlem community, they not only ignored us, but they called out the cops to beat us up and arrest us. Up against the wall, motherfucker, this is a stickup!" Morally and emotionally we could not fit into the civilized world of the racist, defense-oriented modern university. Such was our ordeal of civility.

Only a few of us came to Columbia from red-diaper backgrounds, children of communists. We were good Jewish kids, the cream of the crop, who had accepted the myths of America—democracy, opportunity for all, good intentions toward the world—and of the university—free and open inquiry toward the truth. We were betrayed by our country and the university when we learned, in a relative instant, that the reality wasn't even close to these myths. We third generation American Jews suddenly woke up and realized this country may have been a blessing for us, but not for so many others who couldn't pass for white. I should add that non-Jewish friends and comrades in the New Left experienced very similar feelings of betrayal and outrage, though coming from different backgrounds.

[...]

From my own experience I'm forced to disagree with the theory that there's something special and inherent in our religion which leads us to social activism, altruism, and the left. My former rabbi, Lynn Gottlieb, was fond of telling us that the Torah enjoins us to "honor the stranger because we were strangers in Egypt" forty-six or one hundred and seventeen times. Whatever the number, it was probably one of those laws that needed to be reiterated continually because nobody was observing it.

Dr. Israel Shahak, recently deceased, was a Hebrew University Chemistry Professor, President of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights, and a holocaust survivor. For many years he occupied a place in Israeli politics roughly the same as Noam Chomsky in this country. In a book entitled, "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years," he argues that as a reaction to being the victims of racism throughout the centuries, we developed a religion which itself enshrined racism toward the other. This is especially true of the rabbinical commentaries developed in Eastern Europe over the almost one thousand years in which we occupied a middle position between the landlords, whom we served, and the peasants who despised us and whom we in turn despised. How could it have been otherwise? In my family, if you wanted to say somebody was stupid you said they had a "goyishe kup," a goyish head.

My intention here is not to single out Judaism as being worse than other religions. It is just to say that we are no better. As a kid in Maplewood I never heard of tikkun olam, the now well-known commandment to repair the world. For all I know, Michael Lerner—whose parents, incidentally sat near my parents in shul at Beth El—made the whole thing up.

I am so obviously Jewish that no matter how much carne adovada or fry bread I eat, I'm instantly recognizable as a Jew. I proudly acknowledge the drive for education in Jewish culture which made me want to read about the world and to understand it and to become a teacher. I also recognize that in my social activism I am one of thousands working in the grand tradition of Jewish leftists, the Trotskys and the Emma Goldmans and the Goodmans and Schwerners of the twentieth century. I honor this lineage. As Jews our advantage in the past, though, was that we were outsiders critically looking in; today Jews sit at the right hand of the goy in the White House advising him whom to bomb next in order to advance the Empire.

To be outsiders in a nation or an empire is not such a terrible thing. Keeping critical and alert has allowed the Jewish people to survive all sorts of imperial disasters over the millennia—the Greeks, the Romans, Islam in Spain (which went from Golden Age to Inquisition in a few centuries), the Crusades, Reformation Europe, the Russian Czars, Nazism. This particular empire is neither the first nor the last to attempt to seduce us to join up. But we'd better not: it's our job to be critical outsiders, both for our own survival and for that of the planet.

As a child I never fell for the seduction of patriotism. It seemed so arbitrary, who's an American and who's not. If my relatives hadn't emigrated, who would I be? Since I was also at core an idealist and a utopian—another Jewish tradition?—I wanted to skip all that obviously stupid and dangerous stuff that gave rise to wars and racism. In 1965 I began to identify myself as a socialist and an internationalist. I still am an internationalist since old religions die hard.

[...]

[Bonerjit]

The Jewish Women's Archive, a national non-profit organization whose mission is to "uncover, chronicle, and transmit to a broad public the rich history of American Jewish women," has an informative page on "Jewish Women and The Feminist Revolution."

The page states that "Jewish women have played key roles in building and advancing the modern American women's movement."

[Bonerjit]

[PRCD: Death (and Taxes)]

Quote

Rudd gave a talk in 2005 discussing his experience as a young radical titled, "Why were there so many Jews in SDS? (or, The Ordeal of Civility)."

ANTISEMITIC

Is he any relation to actor Paul Rudd?

[aengus]

Quote

of course Roissy works in DC so the choice is pretty clear for him, not really a choice at all as he marinades in Jewish thinking from dawn to dusk, and likely has forgotten what it is like to live in any other circumstance

Roissy is Jewish.

[PLEASUREMAN]

aengus, on 24 June 2010 - 01:32 PM, said:

Quote

of course Roissy works in DC so the choice is pretty clear for him, not really a choice at all as he marinades in Jewish thinking from dawn to dusk, and likely has forgotten what it is like to live in any other circumstance

Roissy is Jewish.

I was curious about that because he doesn't set off my Jewdar in a big way...how do you know this?

[aengus]

Quote

I was curious about that because he doesn't set off my Jewdar in a big way...how do you know this?

A woman he got into a feud with publicly exposed his anonymity. Apparently he has a Jewish-sounding name.

[Blythe]

Roissy is NOT Jewish.  

He's German/Dutch and Christian.

Edited by ash, 25 June 2010 - 07:58 AM.

[PRCD: Death (and Taxes)]

aengus, on 24 June 2010 - 03:00 PM, said:

Quote

I was curious about that because he doesn't set off my Jewdar in a big way...how do you know this?

A woman he got into a feud with publicly exposed his anonymity. Apparently he has a Jewish-sounding name.

People now think everyone in the United States with a German last name is Jewish, when in reality non-Jewish Germans compose the majority of this country's white population.  



I think we've just discovered a new way in which Jews are harmful.

Roissy was "exposed" by a batshit crazy aging single mother named Lady Raine.  I'm not sure how reliable she is.

Edited by PRCalDude, 25 June 2010 - 09:32 AM.

[Bonerjit]

PRCalDude, on 21 June 2010 - 08:12 AM, said:

Quote

Rudd gave a talk in 2005 discussing his experience as a young radical titled, "Why were there so many Jews in SDS? (or, The Ordeal of Civility)."

ANTISEMITIC

Is he any relation to actor Paul Rudd?

Good question.  Paul Rudd's Wiki indicates that his family's original surname was "Rudnitzky," like Mark Rudd.  And they're both from northern New Jersey.  They probably trace back to the same shtetl.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Rudd

[PRCD: Death (and Taxes)]

Jews are harmful for the way in which they constantly foment recial antagonism between goyish races to distract from their domination of a certain field, demographic, or geographic area:
http://www.thedailyb...-is-very-white/

The slap-fights in the comments make this obvious.