@SecureSignals's banner p

SecureSignals

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

14 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

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

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 853

ADL has ramped up on doxxing X accounts. Not even their usual profiling of right-wing public figures, but literally "this is an X account with a lot of followers who says antisemitic things, this is the real identity of that person." For some reason ADL isn't banned for doing this.

The "risk profile" lol. Yes, there are advocacy groups behind the scenes putting pressure and maybe even making threats if these institutions don't follow along. The point being, his insinuation that Nick is "allowed to continue talking about what is ostensibly the most incendiary third rail of American politics" without noting that he is banned from nearly every single Social Media platform except Rumble and X (only recently and due to Musk acquiring X and unbanning him), and he's literally banned from banking and engaging in electronic transactions in USD.

Isn't this exactly what Fuentes accuses Jews of doing?

Fuentes has always done an "Hey I'm an Afro-Latino bit." Denying he's a "White Supremacist" is understandable, it's just a slur. It's like if the officer were to ask "are you a heretic?"

He's allowed to continue talking about what is ostensibly the most incendiary third rail of American politics - the "Jewish question"

He is literally banned from banking. He's not allowed to have a bank account. He's also banned from all credit card and payment processors so he can't even make money selling merchandise like hats. He can only take donations through crypto. Despite never having been convicted of a crime, he's debanked. You do realize even violent criminals are allowed to have bank accounts and process credit card transactions to sell merchandise? He isn't.

How does one get debanked like that without massive, backdoor coordination of influential people?

He was also put temporarily on the No Fly List, although the circumstances of that are disputable since the process is not transparent. He had some crypto that somebody donated to him seized from the government. As mentioned, he's not even able to sell hats because every time he tries to establish a payment processors he gets banned.

There is maximum pressure put onto him, really the whole debanking thing shouldn't even be legal in the first place. It's a novel way to get around the First Amendment by financially ruining somebody for their speech using the power of a heavily regulated industry.

Isn't this exactly what Fuentes accuses Jews of doing?

No, it's not at all what Fuentes accuses Jews of doing. Fuentes accuses Jews of presenting as White to levy criticisms of White people or otherwise low-key advocate for Jewish interests. This is a distinctly Jewish behavior. There are no White people who put on a super Jewish aesthetic and present as Jewish to talk to "fellow Jewish people" while actually promoting White interests and criticizing Jews. That doesn't happen and it's not what's happening here, Nick is just invoking his heritage to discredit the accusation of heresy ("White Supremacy").

Why do you think he's a fed? I hear people say this, but they only point to the fact he wasn't charged for J6 even though he never went near or inside the Capitol Building so it's a much different case than all the trespassers who got charged. Not strong evidence at all IMO.

Nick posted video from his front porch confirming he was targeted by the killer, who called him by name. He tried opening the door but it was locked.

Nick was also charged recently for pepper spraying some liberal woman who rang his doorbell to confront him about his "Your body my choice" joke, which has some 100 million views now on X.

Would this incident help aid in his defense that he was afraid for his life? I don't think so although it would be a contributing factor to sentencing.

But that is what the AJC is claiming and that is what I am responding to my OP you have quoted here. The AJC has accused him of Holocaust Revisionism based on his praise for Calin Geogescu. I have asked you and @Amadan to explain how that is Holocaust Revisionism. You continue to refuse to do so, except for just saying "it's definitely Holocaust Revisionism." How?

I'm a Holocaust Revisionist, so I know it when I see it! I want you to explain to me why Calin Geogescu praising Ion Antonescu as a national hero is Holocaust Revisionism. Don't just say it is, make a simple argument for why that statement is true.

You just openly and shamelessly do this double-speak and then freeze up when asked to lay out clearly why what you are saying is true. And then you accuse me of dishonesty.

Oh it's the businesspeople of course. I think "pro-EU elites" is getting closer and that is certainly part of it.

Do you admit that one of the main reasons for consternation over European Nationalism and growth of right-wing parties is anti-semitism among the "pro-EU elites?" Do you not believe them when they essentially outright say "we can't have a right wing because of the Holocaust?"

What's so amazing is that you don't even take the "pro-EU elites" at their own word that they are very concerned about anti-semitism, or at least that is an excuse they use to clamp down on those parties with increasingly anti-democratic measures. You don't even believe them when they say it directly.

this was answered, you are doing your usual dance again of wasting time of others...

This was not answered at all. How is a Romanian Nationalist praising a Romanian Nationalist Leader "Holocaust Revisionism"? There is a correct answer to this, but you have certainly not given any answer at all.

If you actually start posting about something other than Da Joos, I will stop pointing out that you do nothing but Joo-post.

At this point, you're the one who should get modded, and you would if you weren't a mod yourself. Your posting is just so tedious, why not engage in the discussion instead of constantly expressing your disapproval that I'm talking about this?

You are free to draw your own conclusions, my conclusion is that the political pressures mentioned in the Reuters article are more relevant to the actual snap decision than Russian influence in TikTok. Mostly because the latter has no basis to support it, they were pulled out of thin air after the authorities did not like the results of the first round of elections.

And if you accept these elections were shut down in order to anti-democratically put an obstacle for the growth of the Right Wing in Romania/Europe, then the Reuters article and AJC letter are revelatory for where the real concerns are coming from and the actual tactics that they are using to repress right wing influence in Europe.

But you are free to believe that the elections were cancelled because Russia interfered by influencing TikTok and not for those other reasons, if you want to believe that!

The election was cancelled to prevent the growth of a European right wing, because EU "Democracy" cannot allow a real Right Wing. The AJC pressure with the accusation of Holocaust Denial, the Elie Wiesel Institute in Romania being delegated official EU censor, those are examples of how this political suppression is actually happening. Of course there are other factors as well. But Reuters has admitted the pressure is coming from this direction, and the story of Russia manipulating TikTok holds no water whatsoever.

Feel free to keep wasting your time grandstanding, I'm just going to ask you the same question again:

Can you Amadan, parse for me why a Romanian Nationalist praising a Romanian Nationalist leader constitutes Holocaust Revisionism?

Why would the Rabbi from the AJC make this claim? Explain that to me, and if you decide to continue whining about me talking about "da Joos" I'm just going to ask this same question again in response.

This is unfortunately characteristic of all your replies to me, you just grandstand with irrelevant jabs and don't even engage the point I'm making.

Can you Amadan, parse for me why a Romanian Nationalist praising a Romanian Nationalist leader constitutes Holocaust Revisionism? That's a serious question I expect you to answer. You just take the double-speak in stride and don't even think to question it.

Sadly you devolve to the same baseless accusations of dishonesty even though I'm extremely upfront about what I believe. The core controversies surrounding Holocaust Revisionism are not directly even related to the WW-II narrative surrounding Antonescu, so why would I bring them up? Your accusation that I'm being dishonest by not mentioning those other matters is just another of many examples of you being extremely uncharitable instead of engaging my argument.

Upwards of 85 million people died in WW-II, the fact we're cancelling Democratic elections in 2024, and underneath the veneer of psyopping the West into thinking it's because of Russian interference in TikTok, under the hood the, um, responsible decision makers are citing his praise for Antonescu, is outrageous. Citing the fact that Jews died in shootings or resettlement in WW-II should not even remotely justify this act by Western Democracy (TM). I don't think I misrepresented at all, I think your representation is actually worse than mine was as mine had slightly more detail than what you are mentioning.

It's just such a Jewish-centric view of the world, we can cancel elections if someone praises a leader who got Jews killed during WW-II, a war in which tens of millions were purposefully killed by world leaders on all sides? Are we able to cancel elections if a candidate praises a world leader or national hero who was responsible for getting white people killed in WWII, or getting Romanians killed under Communism? Are Jews just that special?

Antonescu is not even accused of being involved in the alleged operation to gas millions of people inside gas chambers that had been disguised as shower rooms, and @Stefferi apparently considers it illegal Holocaust Denial to praise someone who died before WW-II even started, based on the fact that person was an "anti-semite." Can we take notice now that Democracy is just being cancelled now and these Holocaust Study institutes are just officially being delegated as EU censors?

The allegations of Russian media operations seems to stem from Calin Georgescu's social media success on TikTok. I've previously discussed how the TikTok ban was ultimately determined by Zionist support for deplatforming a source of highly-successful anti-Israel content, with accusations of China manipulating the algorithm to boost pro-Palestine content only being substantiated by pointing to the success of those content tags. China was a scapegoat for the TikTok ban in the US, and Russia appears to be the scapegoat for the cancelled elections in Romania based on a very similar logic, as @theSinisterMushroom pointed out the actual evidence of content manipulation on TikTok in Georgescu engagement is basically non-existent.

On that note, it was only a few days ago that the American Jewish Committee, uh, wrote letters that they were very concerned about the first round of the election:

AJC Expresses Concern About Romanian Presidential Candidate with History of Antisemitism and Holocaust Revisionism:

Rabbi Andrew Baker, Director of International Jewish Affairs for American Jewish Committee, has written a letter to Romanian President Klaus Iohannis and Romanian Foreign Minister Luminita Odobescu expressing concern about the victory in the first round of the Romanian presidential election by Cailin Georgescu.

In the letter, Baker called Georgescu a “person who fuels the flames of anti-Semitism, who personally promotes Holocaust revisionism, and who, through his political views, defies the essential purpose of NATO."

The full text of the letter is below:

...

The first round of the Romanian Presidential elections last week has seen the victory of a candidate who is anathema to everything that we have worked for together. He is someone who fans the flames of antisemitism, who personally promotes Holocaust revisionism, and who by his political views challenges the essential purpose of NATO. Surely, this cannot be indicative of Romania today.

Calin Georgescu's "Holocaust Revisionism" amounts to praise for Romania's WWII wartime leader Ion Antonescu, who was in the 90s still well-regarded among anti-Communist sympathizers. Antonescu's image was dinged some as Elie Wiesel Commission did its relentless Holocaust guilt-tripping campaign. Western-aligned media focused on maligning the Antonescu administration due to deporting Jews to the East in Transnistria without the proper supplies, doing mass reprisal shootings in response to partisan attacks and other stuff, grossly exaggerating the intentions behind it. After a while it had become increasingly untenable to make positive statements about Antonescu's leadership in the presence of the left, in high society or among politicians. (And of course it's illegal "Holocaust denial" too.)

So the question of Russian interference in TikTok is likely the least important question, as that issue is a scapegoat for other problems, as alluded to by Reuters:

Also of concern to European allies is Georgescu describing as national heroes and "martyrs" Ion Antonescu, Romania's de facto World War Two leader, sentenced to death for his part in Romania's Holocaust, and Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, a pre-World War Two leader of the Iron Guard, one of Europe's most violent anti-Semitic movements.

The EU diplomat said Georgescu's views on the pair, as well as on NATO, would increase tensions both at home and abroad if he came to power. "Imagine the discussions in the (European) Council, imagine the polarisation he would bring at home," said the EU diplomat.

EU "Democracy" is just the biggest lie there is. On another note, that Elie Wiesel National Institute for Studying the Holocaust in Romania referenced by the Rabbi in his letter expressing, uhm, concern over the first round of the election? That exact same institute is now, as of last month, a Trusted flagger under the Digital Services Act (DSA) in the EU. The line between Holocaust studies and outright legal censorship of political dissidents no longer even exists, the same "institutes" just have both jobs at the same time officially, now.

Liberalism was built by and for 130-IQ Anglos, which leaves me wondering why you think the rest of the world will be as passionate about muh Social Contract. It was created as a post-hoc rationalization for their own political and imperial and separatist ambitions. Muh Social Contract and "inalienable rights" are nothing except noble lies they made to justify their own expansion of power. It's not suitable for the Globalist Age foremost because it's not true, and secondly, like you said, it was made by and for them, not for a Globalist Age.

Liberal values are the greatest opponent to eugenics, this should be obvious.

Oh I agree we are in a Globalist Age, and many others on the Online Right are wrong to deny this or think it's even avoidable. But is clinging to Liberalism really the best path forward given this reality? Pax Americana is not even close to a worthy justification for clinging to the noble lies of Liberalism. It's actually a reason to jettison it.

The demand for unconditional surrender was justified on liberal precepts and was very much unlike all those feudal wars throughout history in which it was SOP to sue for peace and come to a political arrangement. In WWI this outcome was disrupted by American intervention, and in WWII this outcome was enforced on the altar of liberal values. So the liberal/Marxist demand for unconditional surrender, directly related to their own fantasy-crafting about the "good vs evil" nature of the conflict, has to be related to the massive destruction of that war in addition to the technological improvements. And likewise the technology has to account for the 80 years of relative military peace due to the threat of MAD from not just nukes but conventional warfare.

But if we are going to do an account of "80 years of peace" under liberalism, you also have to account for demographic replacement in the US and Europe. Maybe abandoning certain values and sensibilities reduced the frequency of armed conflict, but it has led directly to demographic suicide. That's not a "peace" in my book.

Edit: January 1943, that's when Roosevelt and Churchill publicly and officially made the war aim "unconditional surrender." How does that not make you rage with anger? That is justified with liberal platitudes, show me a feudal conflict like that, as bloody as they were...

The allies demanded unconditional surrender citing the "barbarian leaders" of the enemy and then proceeded to firebomb and nuke hundreds of thousands of civilians while declaring themselves the blameless heroes. You can't let liberalism off the hook for this or even compare it to feudal conflicts which do not at all appear to have been motivated by this distinctly modern "good vs evil" narrative-crafting.

I feel the instinctive pull of the liberals (and later Marxists) who grasped the profoundly predatory core which underlay the supposedly chivalrous institutions of feudalism... Personally, I don’t want to have my legs blown off on some foreign shore because the men who have power over me decided that the real world can be modeled as a conflict between blameless heroes and mindlessly-evil orcs.

I think it's interesting you relate this to chivalry and feudalism given Liberalism and Marxism joined forces on the most destructive war in human history, ostensibly over Danzig, and retconned it to a fantasy between the lines of blameless heroes and mindlessly-evil orcs. Not that you agree with the framing, but I question the relation of that behavior to chivalry and feudalism.

Martin's critique of classical virtues fails because he has not and it seems cannot finish the story. So people who find Martin's critique cogent should also realize he was unable to finish the story, likely because he is unable to do so without leaning heavily on the values and archetypes he has deconstructed.

I actually think it's entirely possible that the Zionists aligned with Silicon Valley and Musk/Trump are also going to adopt a nearly-alt right stance on immigration and remigration and race writ-large. Mostly because they are seeing with their own eyes the impact of diversity on their cultural and geopolitical interests. I do expect they are going to slow down or even reverse the overt anti-white hatred. It's already happening. They are going to just hand us most of what the "alt right" has been asking for, or at least enough of a veneer to satisfy or even deradicalize people. It's one of the downsides of Trump winning, I wish this chaotic "Dissident Right" sphere had 10 more years to incubate and evolve but I think they are going to be placated by the major pivot that is going to happen away from wokeness and open borders.

Nope, that didn't happen, the leak was of Destiny and a bunch of Nick's enemies on Twitter all claimed it was him. Although they were knowingly lying. It's interesting how a scandal around Destiny was psyopped into a Nick scandal, literally every comment in the Reddit thread that hit the front page about this was about Nick even though he was uninvolved.

It never was, religioisity cannot answer ethnic questions.

Religiosity is the answer to the most pertinent racial questions, just ask the Jewish people. That's why it can't be Christian Nationalism.

But Nick's "stock" isn't falling (if that's even true) because of purity spiraling, it's because some people who hate him are just lying about him being part of a scandal he has no relation to... that's not purity spiraling it's just a vendetta.

It is completely unclear in your post that you were aware the "rumors" are just blatantly false claims with no basis in truth. You pass them along as "rumored to be" without disclosing that you know they are false.

I'm not even opposed to punching right. I wouldn't mind seeing Nick's movement fail because I don't think Christian Nationalism is the answer for the Right. I'm in general in favor of the divisiveness to some extent, high-variance communities and hopefully everything evolves in a more constructive way. But just lying about this and then coming here and saying "there's this rumor going around!" when you know it's not true is really stupid and does make me more sympathetic to Nick relative to the people who are knowingly spreading a false claim.

I think the credibility is fairly serious, they may have bullied Nick Fuentes but they have also made fools of all their followers who believed them. I don't like Nick but the gayops are offputting. Some liberal progressive like Destiny gets involved in a pretty big scandal and that sphere of Twitter makes it all about a false accusation towards Fuentes? Seems pretty stupid.

Fuentes is not alt-lite, the alt-lite is not alright because alt-right talking points are now fairly ubiquitous on X. Things like remigration and "Great Replacement" and "anti-white" are all essentially mainstream. The alt-lite doesn't have a market anymore because the alt right is going mainstream, and that was the entire purpose of the alt-lite, to try to grift on the parts of the alt-right that were congruent enough with the mainstream to not get banned.

I'm not sure if you're just gullible, but it's absolutely not Nick Fuentes in that Destiny leak. That is a claim which has been made mostly by the "Dissident Right" figures surrounding the BAP/Peter Thiel network who all hate Fuentes because Fuentes calls them out as crypto-Jewish dissemblers who adopt an Aryan Twitter aesthetic and then try to orient the Alt-Right in a pro-Israel, Kosher direction. So they have no problem lying, I guess, to hurt Fuentes in a scandal he's not involved in whatsoever.

The online DR is as fractured as ever, as someone on DR twitter yesterday made an apt comparison to Gangs of New York. But the "rumor" about Fuentes and Destiny is just a lie perpeatured by the left-wing and especially BAP factions of X, who are knowingly lying. But burning their credibility to get at Fuentes is worth it for them, I guess?

I say this as someone who doesn't like the Christian Nationalist project of Fuentes, for basically the reasons given by Richard Spencer.