@SecureSignals's banner p

SecureSignals

Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine

13 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 06 13:34:27 UTC

				

User ID: 853

SecureSignals

Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine

13 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 06 13:34:27 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 853

So their failure to meet your hypocritical, admittedly impossible demands apparently constitutes a validation of your worldview.

If it's impossible for Jews to treat non-Jewish white people with the same interest that they treat Jews, then how is that not an admission of the underlying conflict and problem?

The ADL never says "Look at that 'It's OK to be White' poster, we have to oppose this to make sure blacks aren't re-enslaved." They say "we can never have the Holocaust again, so we need a whole-of-society effort to suppress this."

Why, when even white people will not do this themselves?

They did for the vast majority of the existence of the United States, and that radically changed along with the change in elite composition and saliency of prevailing Grand Narratives, specifically around WWII and later the Holocaust. White identity has been made taboo by these grand narratives formulated by our cultural institutions. If you ask the average person why advocating for White people is the most evil thing in the world, they will surely respond "What do you mean, haven't you seen Schindler's List?!"

The post-WWII and Holocaust narrative has formulated an anti-fascist dialectic on both the left and right. The left is anti-fascist because of their social liberalism, and the right is anti-fascist because of their economic libertarianism. But they all agree Hitler is the anti-Christ of this post-war moral Universe. This is the cultural context in which white people have turned against their own self-interests.

Jews who have supported ‘the interests of white people’ like Stephen Miller don’t change your mind, nor do Jewish reactionaries like BAP.

I could turn this around and ask why Jews haven't allowed their mind to be changed about supporting White identity given all of the benefits and friendly relations they have enjoyed from the West since the end of the Second World War.

To this day, Jews will go and wail like toddlers at a freakin' wall to constantly relive a thousands-year old offense, and they won't allow a single shred of advocacy for White people without invoking the Holocaust and "Never Again" to explain why it's beyond-the-pale. Anybody who wants to advocate for white people or White identity is absolutely correct that Jewish influence in cultural and political life is the most significant barrier to accomplishing this. Unless that changes, which it won't, it's misdirected to say that the Cart is driving the Horse, or claim that Dissident Right twitter is the reason Jewish influence is so hostile towards white identiy.

King Charles' very first speech featured a promise to construct the new Holocaust Temple in the gardens in plain view of parliament. That way, any lawmakers or citizens walking by the center of political power cannot do so without being reminded of Jewish suffering. There's just not much room to doubt the source of these cultural narratives that have inspired bitter hostility towards white identity.

There's another word for that sort of belief: unfalsifiable.

What would prove antisemites wrong would be for Jews to systematically exert their talents and influence for the interests of white people. Basically, for them to treat white people as they treat their own in-group, or even putting white people above their own in-group in political and cultural conflict. That's not going to happen, and I don't even necessarily blame them for it, it's just something that has to be accepted.

Look at 2rafa who has said that we can't support a White identity because it might be threatening to Jews. Accepting this premise is true, yes it is very difficult for Antisemites to be proven wrong with the remaining options for how Jews should respond to Antisemitism given that, you know, "be on the side of white identity" isn't an option.

I don't think they will team up. I think the gentile left will decline and the hard right will grow. And I don't think the progressive left will just become moderates either. I think those people likely have personality characteristics that make them affine to ostensibly radical causes, basically a latent Religious impulse. It is said that former Communists made far more loyal members of the Nazi party than conservatives.

I don't think that's true, I think this forum is mostly committed to an HBD interpretation as IQ explaining disparate outcomes and elite composition without Noticing an underlying ethnic conflict between Jews and gentiles. @2rafa for example will rely on HBD and IQ to explain elite composition, but then when it comes to explaining the actual cultural and political output of that elite, then that is fully explained by 18th century liberalism without regard to the identity, or HBD-characteristics, of that elite.

But it's getting harder and harder for 2rafa to rely on 18th century liberalism to explain the behavior of Zionists in American political and cultural life.

In my experience, when you Notice you don't un-Notice just because you see something cringe from a nazi loser.

I've never liked the term "white genocide." The word genocide itself is just a word that gets to be claimed by the victor, as the definition is broad enough to be applied to nearly every conflict...

Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Destroying a group "in whole or part" is just up to the interpretation of the victor. So if you have no power, like white nationalists, claiming you are being genocided is just going to be dismissed and valid complaints about i.e. demographic replacement are discredited.

In any event, this should just confirms that Jews are right to be wary of encroaching antisemitism.

In the past I've described antisemitism as anti-fragile. So let's say Jews are going to respond to antisemitism. What are they going to do that isn't going to further and visibly validate the arguments made by antisemites? Pushing for greater authoritarianism in the public discourse is their only strategy, and it's becoming less effective quite rapidly.

On the other hand, I think this rhetoric is going to have a real deterrent effect on Jews. You are going to be less likely to see people like Jon Stewart say things like "Jews and blacks should gang up on whitey." Even the ADL is relatively mum recently despite Musk now overtly endorsing DR rhetoric, likely due to the negative PR campaign started by Keith Woods.

It's really crazy how much the discourse is shifting. Tucker Carlson now directly calling out Jewish mega-donors for facilitating "White Genocide" (his words) in contrast with their pearl-clutching over campus opposition to Israel. Even some left-wing commentators like Kyle Kalinski are Noticing at levels never seen in our lifetimes.

There's a Civil War at the Daily Wire, with Candace Owens delivering a scathing endorsement of Nikki Haley as "president of Isreal" and Ben Shapiro responding with bridge-burning insults. Nikki Haley, for her part, has said she would respond to the rise in Anti-Semitism by de-anonymizing social media, for "National Security". With Nikki Haley's own campaign channel considering this clip from the Republican debate to be worthy of actually posting on the channel, Owens isn't far off.

This all does make me concerned for a Nikki Haley surge, although Trump isn't less pro-Israel than Haley, and Biden has proven to be sufficiently pliable and his administration isn't exactly composed of people who are going to threaten American loyalty to Israel regardless of anything Israel chooses to do.

Israel struck the Al-Shifa hospital and then lied about the source being misfired Palestinian munitions. The IDF even provided a trajectory map of the projectiles which they claimed to be based on radar detections:

It was the first of at least four strikes involving multiple munitions on different sections of the sprawling complex between 1 a.m. and 10 a.m. Friday morning. Al-Shifa’s director, Dr. Mohammed Abu Salmiya, said in a phone interview that seven people had been killed and several others had been wounded.

Hours after the final blast, the Israeli military blamed unspecified Palestinian militants, saying a “misfired projectile” aimed at Israel Defense Forces troops deployed nearby had instead hit the hospital.

But at least three of the projectiles that struck it appear to have been Israeli munitions, according to pictures of weapons fragments collected and verified by The New York Times and analyzed by experts...

Israel’s assertion that Al-Shifa was actually hit by a Palestinian projectile echoed similar — and unresolved — claims and counterclaims following munitions that hit the courtyard of another Gaza hospital, Al-Ahli, nearly a month ago...

In addition to the weapons remnants, an analysis of video footage shows that three of the projectiles were fired into the hospital from the north and south, contrary to the western trajectory indicated on a map released by the I.D.F., which it said was based on radar detections. A review of satellite images showed there were I.D.F. positions north and south of the hospital early Friday.

The strikes analyzed by The Times did not appear to be targeting underground infrastructure. Two of the most severe strikes hit upper floors of the maternity ward.

Sam Harris really is a demonstration of everything wrong with New Atheism, and he's finally mask off as a partisan for his preferred Yahweh cults. He wants to read the rhetoric of the Jihadi group, how about he reads the rhetoric of the intellectual Zionist figureheads and the leaders of "liberal western civilized order."

I remember when it was a scandal that George Bush reportedly told a Palestinian delegation that God told him to go to Iraq. I remember "New Atheists" being rightfully apoplectic. Reading that article about the Bush scandal again, there is one detail I never knew, which is that Bush's statement that God told him to invade Iraq was proceeded by another statement:

And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it.

Maybe Sam Harris wants to read the apocalyptic and messianic prophesy that formulates the foundational core of Zionism. This conflict is eschatological, the Zionist claims are fundamentally and intrinsically based on bible stories of Yahweh giving them the land. Where is Sam Harris when Bibi is invoking the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy to moralize Israel's war against Hamas? Where are the New Atheists now that our brand new House Speaker is saying "God will bless the nation that blesses Israel." Or Mike Pompeo saying:

Christians have an obligation to ensure that Israel continues to be the rightful homeland of the Jewish people

Where are the New Atheists now? Converting to "Judeo-Christianity"?

This conflict isn't about oil or about Islam, it's about the Bible. That's why we are here in this endless conflict over a small piece of desert land. We need a New New Atheist movement that takes all of Yahwehism to task because all strains of it are anti-civilizational. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, none of them are innocent in these inter-Abrahamic wars and it's time to move past worship of Yahweh if we actually care about Western civilization.

Perfidious, deceitful

Gad Saad is unable to hide his contempt for ordinary white people, but in his next breath he's a stalwart defender of Western demographics. No he isn't, he's a Jewish ethnonationalist trying to give permission to White people to be racist towards Arabs on behalf of the war being fought by his tribe.

It's similar to the sentiment "Britain is finished if Jews no longer feel safe here". So Britain isn't finished when there are no more British, or when British are denied their identity and claim to particularity and self-advocacy. It's finished when Jews don't feel safe. When Gad Saad and Ben Shapiro start adopting these alt-right talking points, the Neocon grift is obvious.

I like Zach Snyder's film 300, but it's not lost on me that Hollywood producing such a sincerely fascist film took place at a moment time when many were beating the war-drum for America to go to war against the Persians. Fascism is a white interpretation of Socialism, and Neoconservatism is a Jewish interpretation of Fascism. The resurgence of 2003 neoconservatism with the assimilation of dissident right rhetoric is not something I agree with, even if they are able to say some things I agree with- no, I'm actually not falling for it and I can see clearly what they are doing. I strongly oppose the resurgence of 2003 neoconservatism. It's predictable they would try to steer the energy of the alt-right towards opposing their own enemies in endless Middle East conflict. But they won't allow that energy to be used to actually advoacte for white people.

Getting upset about Jews turning against mass immigration because they have the temerity to acknowledge your own (real) contempt for them seems cheap.

Jews are turning against mass immigration because they now perceive some parts of it to be against their own ethnic interests. So their (highly limited and far-too-late) turnaround is perfectly aligned with complaints about their behavior: they support what's in the interest of Jews, even at the expense of White people. When mass immigration is at the expense of White people but benefits Jews, they have no problem with it. Now they have a problem with it because of their war against the Arab world, and I'm supposed to pretend that this means their interests are now aligned with mine?

Nathan Cofnas is an example of a Jew engaging in some honest self-reflection (although he makes some dubious assumptions). Gad Saad and Ben Shapiro and others trying to make their religio-tribal war a matter of "Judeo-Christian civilization" hanging in the balance is perfidious and deceitful no matter how much alt-right window dressing they try to throw on top of it.

The irony (and I say this as someone who doesn’t like him) is that half the people clowning on Saad for saying hardcore white antisemitism still exists in the US are literally hardcore white antisemites such as yourself on dissident right Twitter.

Gad Saad felt compelled to dunk on the demographic that might be the most pro-Israel on the entire planet. Maybe it's Dissident Right Twitter's fault that Gad Saad hates the average White person from Arkansas. But Dissident Right twitter wasn't around for the 2003 Neoconservative era, where working class White Christians were helplessly manipulated into supporting Israel, and that didn't spare them from the ethnic contempt of Jews in academia, popular culture, and political policy. Their demographic decline has been celebrated.

So now we will be having New Atheist influencers peddling this stuff harder (and old fighters for Pure Reason like Gad Saad will be asked to pipe it down with habitual anti-whitey remarks).

Right on cue: now the problem isn't Whitey from Nebraska, it's unassimilable migration that is causing the Death Spiral of the West. These Jews adopting 2016 alt-right talking points for their immediate benefit aren't going to convince anyone.

How would they have been pushed out if they had a sovereign state?

Sovereignty was never on the table, the Israeli "offer" has always been contingent on demands of demilitarization along with various Israeli control of borders and airspace.

Not to mention that, if the claims commonly repeated on here about the terrible effects of higher gas prices on the well-being of US citizens are true, preventing a wider conflict serves the interests of those citizens.

Imagine still trying to shill the "US military Intervention in the Middle East is due to oil, it's not about Israel" talking point at this point.

If Zionists control the US, they're doing a shit job of steering our foreign policy. The Israelis can't even invade Gaza, the people responsible for breaking into their country to rape and mutilate women and children on video, without daddy's approval.

Antony Blinken is basically embedded in the Israeli government at this point. The American insistence for Israel to delay ground invasion is reportedly so America can move "defenses" into position in the case of a regional outbreak of war. The delay is to allow America to become directly involved.

Then the Israelis basically get to decide if America gets involved in a regional war with how they escalate the conflict.

If it were 30 wounded and 0 dead then yeah that would be significant.

But my point is that there's a difference between the immediate reaction of the Press reporting breaking news out of Gaza, when they have no opportunity to have reporters on the ground, and the reports from the supposedly "independent investigations" which all concluded the same incorrect thing all based on the same error in interpretation of the same piece of evidence. I maintain it's more significant that the Press was systematically all wrong in the same direction in their "independent investigations" than it is that they reported the Hamas-claimed death toll with varying degrees of qualification.

A hospital was not bombed and I don't think there is a credible estimate on deaths.

Come on, if a parking garage at a hospital was bombed, especially if there was a congregation of people seeking treatment or refuge, it would be considered a hospital bombing. It was part of the facility.

IIRC this launch corresponded to PIJ announcing they were using one of their new longer-range (read: bigger) rockets, so the prior spontaneous failure rate probably should be estimated to be pretty high.

What's the distribution of mortality among these rocket failures? This would be a massive outlier, even assuming only 50 casualties. It hit the perfect spot, at some unspecified distance from where NYT reports that Israel was striking only two minutes before. My priors are just that it was an intentional strike, and "this launch corresponded to PIJ announcing they were using one of their new longer-range (read: bigger) rockets" is just weak evidence of a rocket failing in such a way and happening to strike that spot. It's another assumption of a new type of rocket other than the thousands others that have been launched from Hamas. So my priors are moving in the opposite direction if these are the sort of assumptions that need to be layered on to make the Israeli side of the story plausible.

Without the video which did show some sort of rocket failing at about the same time (and turned out to be an Israeli rocket !!), I don't know what evidence there actually is that this extremely unusual thing actually happened. Like I said, this video formulated previously what I thought was the strongest evidence for the Israeli side (but it didn't convince me then), so it's significant it's debunked.

I do wonder if these initial reports spooked the IDF into instituting a flat denial of what would have been an intentional strike that was less extraordinary than initially reported.

In any case, the press initially reported excessive death tolls (how excessive is TBD) but then in the subsequent days and weeks their narrative shifted to relying on a bad piece of evidence to draw conclusions with high confidence. The initial press reaction to the news that was coming out of Gaza (where reporters are not allowed) is less telling than the narrative the congealed in the days and weeks after, a narrative that appears to have been based on bad evidence that they all got wrong.

Is there a different video you would say provides the best evidence that the explosion was due to a rocket failure? From the beginning I found that story hard to believe, but I considered the now-debunked video the best evidence for it (like all the news orgs etc). Without that, the recording released by Israel seems to be the strongest evidence... And that's not saying much.

In any case, certain people here have absolutely jumped the gun by accusing the press of being "stenographers for terrorism." The situation is murkier than that, and if anything the Press has helped Israel's narrative by appealing to a now-debunked piece of evidence to all draw "high-confidence" conclusions...

Didn't CNN, the AP, and the WSJ, et al. all rely on this video as a "key piece of evidence" for their conclusion? And this video was cited by IDF spokesman in media interviews.

A key video in the analysis came shortly before 7 p.m. local time, when the Arabic-language news channel Al Jazeera was airing live coverage of the Gaza City skyline. As a correspondent speaks, the camera pans to zoom in on a volley of rockets being fired from the ground nearby.

Superiority is defined by many dimensions by my estimation, dimensions that can be reduced towards civilizationally-oriented and eugenic behavior. The talent to deceive others is a talent, but having more of that talent does not make you superior. Maybe a swindler has a much higher IQ and silver tongue compared to his hapless victim, but I consider "merit" along that dimension to be contemptible and would raise the question for how civilizational order should deal with such people.

Trump famously assigned arguably the most crucial policy position on Israel/Palestine to his Jewish son-in-law who has close ties to Israel. But I do think the difference in representation means something significant. Under the Trump administration, stopping immigration and closing the borders was a top priority although they largely failed due to all the pushback from the administrative state. Then Biden comes into office, the cabinet changes, Jews like Alejandro Mayorkas take over DHS, and what happens? Borders wide open to unprecedented levels of immigration, DHS and Biden Administration makes huge pushes to combat anti-Semitism. DHS/US Intelligence identifies White Supremacy as the greatest domestic threat.

The "big winners" of DHS grants under the Biden Administration have been the Jews, who saw funding for the NonProfit Security Grant Program balloon from $180 million to $305 million, and just now US Senators have proposed an increase to $500 million in funding.

Looking at the massive changes in policy priorities from the Trump Administration- building the wall and stopping illegal immigration, to the Biden Administration- identifying White Supremacy as the greatest domestic security threat, whole-of-society efforts to combat anti-Semitism, massively increasing DHS funding to Jewish NGOs, suggests that this does have meaning and impact on the policy priorities at the highest level of government.

It's possible that Jews engage in a similar behavior that many ethnic groups do, but they happen to be better at it because of their talents. This dovetails with the recent thread on stigmergy vs conspiracy. There is no "conspiracy" needed in the vein of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to vindicate questions surrounding Jewish behavior and power. "Merit vs conspiracy" is a false dichotomy.