Ethnonationalism for the Jew, but Not You – Bill Clinton and Goyim Complicity in Zionist Hypocrisy

Ah, Slick Willy Clinton. I must admit, I have mixed feelings on the man. On the one hand, he did preside over an era of great prosperity and growth. However, his various political transgressions cannot be ignored. In addition to the economic travesties of NAFTA and opening up U.S. trade to China (and we all know how that has turned out), he has proven himself to be quite the hypocrite on issues relating to diversity and multiculturalism.

While still president of the United States, Bill Clinton delivered a 1998 commencement speech to the (predominantly white) students of Portland State University in which he extolled the virtues of mass immigration and multiculturalism. Obviously, one would have to be a parochial, jingoistic fool not to recognize the benefits of diversity. However, acknowledging that some white Americans were a little uneasy about recent demographic changes, Clinton had the following to say:

Now, some Americans don’t see it that way. When they hear new accents or see new faces, they feel unsettled. They worry that new immigrants come not to work hard but to live off our largesse. They’re afraid the America they know and love is becoming a foreign land. This reaction may be understandable, but it’s wrong. It’s especially wrong when anxiety and fear give rise to policies and ballot propositions to exclude immigrants from our civic life. I believe it’s wrong to deny law-abiding immigrants benefits available to everyone else; wrong to ignore them as people not worthy of being counted in the census. It’s not only wrong, it’s un-American.

Un-American indeed. It seems that only countries such as the United States have moral obligations to open their borders to the world and render their majorities minorities in the name of “diversity.” Clinton seems to acknowledge this, for he embraces a radically different attitude towards multiculturalism when it comes to Israel. Speaking at the Peres Academic Center in Rehovot, Israel, in honor of the former Israeli prime minister and current president’s 90th birthday, Clinton warned Israel to embrace the two-state solution, lest they face a demographic crisis:

 If it was “okay with you” to have a majority of people denied the vote in an expanded Israel, so be it, he said, but “would you be a democracy?” And “if you let them [the Palestinians] vote, would you be a Jewish state?” he asked rhetorically. “I just don’t think that in all these years a credible alternative has been presented that would preserve the essential character of the state of Israel — a Jewish but democratic state…” No matter how many settlers you put out there, the Palestinians are having more babies than the Israelis as a whole…  You’ve got an existential question to answer.”

There is so much to unpack in Clinton’s above statements. For starters, even as he implored white Americans not to display xenophobia and intolerance against non-white newcomers, he seems to exhibit a callous disregard for the rights of Palestinians, the indigenous people of Israel/historic Palestine. If Israeli Jews don’t want to extend basic equality under the law to Palestinians, so be it.

Also, he is either supremely ignorant or profoundly disingenuous (I’m leaning towards the latter interpretation) to insist that Israel can reconcile itself as a “Jewish and  democratic state.” We’re not talking about Jewish character or cultural dominance, but a blood based racial state that allows anyone with enough Jewish blood to immigrate to Israel and acquire automatic citizenship under Israel’s “law of return.” Needless to say, if the United States were to legally define itself as a “white state” belonging to white people from all over the world, and denied non-whites basic legal equality, would the likes of Bill Clinton hesitate to denounce the undemocratic nature of such a measure? I think not.

Finally, for such a paragon of racial tolerance, one has to laugh at him describing Palestinian babies as an “existential question.” Can you even imagine a mainstream white American politician describing Latino or black babies as an “existential question” that threatens the whiteness of the United States? Just look at the flack Jeb Bush received for the mere crime of referring to immigrants as “fertile.”

Now, I can already see the Zionists frothing at their mouths: “But Bay Area Guy, you anti-Semite! Israel and the United States are DIFFERENT! The United States was founded on ideas, Israel was explicitly founded as a Jewish state! Besides, Jews have faced persecution that whites have not. They need a safe haven for themselves.” 

You’re right, the two societies are different. One is a liberal democracy that has elected a two-term black president, while the other is a blatant ethnocracy that treats all non-Jews as expendable demographic threats.

But putting that aside, the typical Zionist retort to charges of hypocrisy is fallacious. For starters, I find it funny that Zionists often brag about Israel’s liberal characteristics and emphasize the common traits of Israel and the West. “The only democracy in the Middle East,” remember? They’re also quick to emphasize that, in comparison to evil Muslim nations, Israel is the only nation that extends tolerance to Christians. Never mind that Israel’s tolerance of Christians is a myth.

Yet when a few courageous liberals take Israel to task for not abiding by the standards liberal Western democracies use when treating minorities, then all of a sudden Israel is “different,” and should be cut some slack. They’ll embrace comparisons to certain aspects of the American experiment, but genuine equality for all peoples under the law, meh!

Liberal Jewish hypocrisy is nothing new. Kevin MacDonald and others have tirelessly documented the inconsistency between liberal Jews advocating multicultural, atomized societies in the Western countries where they reside, versus their support for Israel as an ethnocratic Jewish state.

However, it needs to be pointed out that these liberal Zionists can operate with such impunity because of white gentile enablers such as Bill Clinton. Cowardly creatures who jump with joy at the thought of their own people becoming minorities, but display tremendous affection for an ethnic group in a small, distant desert.

Therefore, do us a favor. The next time you encounter a white gentile (or any non-Jew for that matter) who worships at the altar of Zionism while simultaneously embracing “diversity” at home, be sure to give him a piece of your mind. It’s a small, but necessary step towards holding these hypocrites accountable.

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Christianity, Immigration, Organized Jewry, Subversion, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Ethnonationalism for the Jew, but Not You – Bill Clinton and Goyim Complicity in Zionist Hypocrisy

  1. batterytrain says:

    At the end of the day Clinton just wants cheap labor and to live in his little enclaves surrounded by walls and gates. Same with Obongo and the rest of the yes men crew, they would do anything to line their pockets and have their fancy private parties and houses paid for by the tax payers. As I said before the primary goal is to return the U.S into some sort of Southern style plantation society with a rigid class setup based on ethnicity and race; what is interesting is that the prime culprit of the slave trade and the slave traders were Arabs/Jews from the Levant regions. Not only did they force Africans slaves into the America’s but they were the biggest slave and plantation owners themselves here and they had a practice of castrating the slaves in their countries so that they wouldn’t reproduce and their kind would end up being the majority in the societies they founded (Levant region, Arab plantations, Iraq etc). The moment that the first African slaves entered the North American continent via the judicial/monetary system was the end of idealism society and beginning of the cheap labor addiction and the eventual folding/setup of the non-assimilable “hard-working immigrants” barrage and monicker.

    Really Clinton could give a rat’s ass about anyone that doesn’t fill his pockets with money and same with obongo and so called system’s politician; Lyndon B Johnson was also terrible in how his social engineering eventually led to snowballing of what we have now with the immigration system, his policy towards the welfare society concerning blacks gave the blue prints to create some sort of permanent underclass dependent and commanded by the government completely and being immune to the legislation and laws of our great judicial works such as the constitution. Once there is a large enough population that fits such categories than the value of the constitution, the legislative system, and all the important papers that prop up our basic laws and the layouts of the United States will just seem insignificant and just be trashed alongside the demographics and other social systems.

    The case of immigrants such as the Irish, Italians, etc prove that euro-immigrants can perform and do hard labor and tasks as well as any illegal or non-Western “hard-working immigrants” that don’t give a shit about the local politics, culture, infrastructure, civilization, Western history, but only their pockets and their shit families. Back in the founding days of the United States, there were a group of Muslim pirates called the Barbary corsairs that forced European seaman to pay tribute to them or face enslavement and kidnapping, these same North Africans and Turks would go as far as Iceland and kidnap the children there, either forced them to work as slave laborers, become slave soldiers or perform other great occupations. The Sultans of these Islamic states in Morocco, Levant, and the Middle East often had these European slaves build palaces for them and other ardent hard laborious tasks, so much so that at one point all towns and cities along the coasts of Mediterranean Europe were almost abandoned. I wouldn’t be surprised if Jews themselves profited from such ventures since they were symbiotically tied to the slave operations and Islamic banking/finances like chaff to wheat. So having outside “hard-working immigrants” and open borders is something of a regular appetizer to Jews and part of their basic societal frameworks.

    What this proves is that you can still have an affordable and efficient infrastructure and labor pool composed entirely of people of European descent which includes labor unions, construction workers, producers, laborer, farmers, smithers, landscapers, gardeners, builders, diggers, miners, lifters, locksmiths, apprentices, factory workers, herders, plumbers, electricians, craftsmen, lumber jacks, washers, waiters, producers and still get good services and most importantly preserve a society of Westerners despite not being shoddy and cheap. Physical labor is very important to a society because it is the fuel and the back bone of the civilization itself, it preserves the working masculinity and strength of men and also it is the root occupation that props the basic society up and provides a cushion for people facing financial difficulties and events out of their hands to fall back on. However preserving the labor force and workers of the country would be one good step towards preserving the basic founding demographics of the country and preventing unwanted migration.

    However I am not a big fan of Christianity (a Jewish religion ultimately), Arabs, Muslims, Jews ofc and other Semite cults and philosophies; really Muslims, Arabs, (Jews being Arabs) can go fuck themselves. There books are not my books and their gods are not my gods, their outlook and philosophies does not matter to me. Their desert gods and fertile crescent god is a selfish and a vain one, he kills more people than the supposed Satan, he kills children, he demands that everyone pays tribute to him only and not other gods and forces everyone to do so, he unleashes plagues and disasters for no reason other than vindication, he encourages violence and brutality and demands sacrifices and other practices that wholly and completely immoral, selfish and egoistic. So the Semite god and his book can fuck off for all I care btw did you know that “Allah” was a Arabic desert moon deity/god when there were other gods that were just as valid as that one?

    • Bay Area Guy says:

      Not only did they force Africans slaves into the America’s but they were the biggest slave and plantation owners themselves here

      Hmm. I’ve heard people argue that Jews were disproportionately involved in the slave trade, but I’ve never found any evidence to suggest that they were the biggest slaveowners in the United States.

      Do you have any links?

  2. batterytrain says:

    Here is one I can come up off the top of my head

  3. Dota and/or BAG, is it true that Ashkenazi Jews and Sephardic Jews are of different genetic stock, and that Askenazis can trace their heitage to Khazarian and Germanic tribes, while Sephardics descend from the original Hebrews? I have been reading this for a while in WN blogs, and I do not know if it is true, or just another WN myth, such as the WN myth that Black Africans are not homo sapiens.

    I have been wondering something along these lines for awhile myself, due to the phenotype of most Askenazis. Their high frequencies of red hair, Nordic craniofacial structure, and physical indistinguishability from most White Americans made me wonder whether they can lay a legitimate claim to Hebrew ancestry, or whether interbreeding and/or lying has falsified that. I am really curious, thanks. I used to be quite an Anti-Semite myself, however I am no longer a racist of any sort.

    • batterytrain says:

      Since when were Celts and red haired people nordic? Also how do Central Europeans have “Nordic features” when they don’t even have the same craniol features or physical traits. I can’t take these people seriously with such stupid misuse of terminology.

    • Dota says:

      I’m no expert on race and genetics, but the theory of the Ashkanazi’s khazar origin has been disputed of late. The real question worth asking is, who were the original Hebrews? Scholars like Norman Cantor and Schlomo Sand have argued that the Hebrews were essentially a group of Canaanites who invented a history for themselves. It’s highly doubtful that the ancient Hebrews existed as a separate race for too long as evidence of intermarrying exists in and outside the Bible. 30% of the Jews in Babylon refused to return to Israel when Cyrus liberated them. It’s also possible that various groups took on the Jewish identity for whatever reason at various points in history.

      Don’t really know much beyond that, sorry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s