Who Invented the Mobile Gas Chamber?

Who Invented the Mobile Gas Chamber?

According to Two Hundred Years Together, written by Alexander Solzhenitsyn (he of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970) it was not Adolph Hitler. Nor was it any number of his Nazi henchmen: i.e. Eichmann, Hess, Himmler, etc.

It was a Jewish man named Isai Berg.

Let’s dig deeper into the excerpt (page 274):

And from the astonishing disclosure in 1990 we learned that the famous mobile gas chambers were invented, as it turns out, not by Hitler during the World War II, but in the Soviet NKVD in 1937 by Isai Davidovich Berg the head of the administrative and maintenance section of the NKVD of Moscow Oblast

As it turns out, Jews were active participants in the Soviet crackdown on freedom. Of course, they were not 100% responsible for these murder, torture, and kidnapping. However, they were partially responsible – a point that our history books have never told us.

A true reading of history will show that Jewish people, just like all other people, are capable of human cruelty.

We’re fighting a war for truth…and it’s time that more American Jews begin to speak it. True, we have some based members of the tribe: RIP to Jerry Lewis. But we don’t have nearly enough. And they can start by using their power (i.e. control of the media) to stop assaulting the honor of Donald J. Trump.

A note to America and Europe: The barbarians (i.e. Muslim terrorists) are not at the gates…they are inside the gates. So we need to get our shit together. This means that the liberal Jewish contingency of the West – from the Hollywood elite to the Beltway bureaucrats – need to realize something quick.

The United States and Europe are the best friends that the Jewish people will ever have; and they are twenty times safer within its borders than they are in Cairo, Libya or Mali.


Was Tevye Really a Farmer? Probably Not.

Was Tevye Really a Farmer? Probably Not.

I am currently reading Two Hundred Years Together. It’s an expansive book by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, written in 2001, that analyzes the Jewish role in the Communist revolution of 1917 (By the vey, where is the 100-year retrospect on CNN?). At any rate, Solzhenitsyn is highly critical of the “chosen people” and their role in this debacle.

For example, he provides the names of Jewish individuals that committed a host of crimes: murder, treason, extortion, etc. Overall, it’s a scathing indictment of the Jewish role in the Russian revolution—and it’s the primary reason that Solzhenitsyn has been removed from the Western liberal clique (in addition to his admiration of Vladimir Putin). Ah…how quickly the lefties can forget a Noble Prize winner.

The book has many insightful parts. However, one narrative stuck with me. It’s regarding the Jewish refusal to do farming work. At one point, international funds were being sent to the USSR so that the Jews could farm in the Crimea. However, despite millions of dollars in incentives, most of the Jews returned to other lines of work: i.e. money lending, various trades, etc.

Solzhenitsyn writes:

This mass departure of Jews from agriculture in the 1920’s and 30’s resembles similar Jewish withdrawal from agricultural colonies in the 19th century, albeit now there were many new occupations available in industry (and in administration, a prohibited field for Jews in Tsarist Russia) (222)

Solzhenitsyn goes on…

In 1926 Kalinin (and other functionaries) received many questions about Jews in letters and at meetings… Among these questions (91): Why do they not farm even though it is now allowed them? (209)

When I read this, I immediately thought of Tevye from the movie Fiddler on the Roof.

Despite the casting of Tevye as a farmer, the reality was different – most Jews did not farm in the Soviet Union.

The movie is based on the life of a poor Jewish farmer (named Tevye), circa 1905, living in a Russian village. However, as we learn from Two Hundred Years Together, this character would have been an anomaly, Most likely, he would have been working in some trade.

Now there is nothing wrong with eschewing agriculture. However, there IS something wrong with lying to the public. There IS something wrong with trying to rewrite history. And there IS something wrong with turning Hollywood into a vehicle for agitative propaganda.

See through this light, we realize an unpleasant fact:

Fiddler on the Roof was partly propaganda, designed to give the public a false view of facts.

In short, it’s goal was to sanctify the Jewish people, while simultaneously denigrating Russia.

The Far Left Needs the White Nationalist Movement

The Far Left Needs the White Nationalist Movement

The left is hanging onto the Charlottesville story for dear life. They realize that if this story fades into another news cycle (which it will) then it’s more losing. But essentially, they’re already in trouble due to a pathological addiction to censorship.

Remember…the BLM was a “Divide and Conquer” campaign orchestrated by the (((media))). Much to their surprise, their time-honored tradition backfired. They overplayed their weasly hand and inadvertently got Donald Trump elected. They were like an over-confident Joe Pisarcik, fumbling the ball away to Herman Edwards at the Miracle in the Meadowlands.

But unlike the BLM, the WN movement is not media-sponsored—nor do they have frequent marches, like the BLM.  Their “optics” (to borrow the word of the day) are far less visible than the BLM. For example, you’ll never see Richard Spencer tearing the microphone out of a presidential candidate’s hand (a la Bernie Sanders). And you’ll never see Spencer get a White House invitation, like Obama gave to the BLM leaders.

And therein lies the Catch-22…

The far left needs more White Nationalist rallies to further their agenda. Yet they’re incapable of letting the events take place, because they’re addicted to censorship.

The Far-Left is Forever Married to the “Muh Russia” Conspiracy

The Far-Left is Forever Married to the “Muh Russia” Conspiracy

The Comey decision will finally end the “muh Russia” controversy. Remember when the wage gap was bedunked? Or what about the campus rape myth? The liberals gave up on the lies!

Oh wait…never mind.

The liberals ALWAYS double down. When you catch them in a lie, they don’t apologize; instead, they go for the bigger lie. The whopper gets larger. They accuse you of doing of what they just did. They gaslight.

Remember the recount? We found out that Democrats were tampering the ballots, and not the Republicans. But the Libs never apologized. Instead, they invented the “muh Russia” conspiracy.

Fifty years from now, the libs will still be crying about Russia – it’s now part of their identity.


Why Liberals are Unable to Acknowledge Islamic Terrorism

Why Liberals are Unable to Acknowledge Islamic Terrorism

I’ve been to several Islamic countries: Morocco, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Palestine and Malaysia. In addition, I’ve traveled to many areas that have been hit by Islamic terrorism: i.e. Southern Thailand, the Philippines (Palawan), most of Europe, etc. Also, I’ve actually read the Koran. So while I’m not an expert, I know more about Islam than the average liberal Westerner.

My experience has taught me this; Most Middle Easterners are decent people and their food is very good: kabobs, hummus, etc. However, there is a very real problem with terrorism. Moreover, the Middle East is, by and large, a depressing shit hole. The famed Arab “hospitality” is virtually non-existent; if anything, the Westerner has to worry about continually being scammed or even attacked. Overall, it’s a place of poverty, genital mutilation, and despair.

You won’t find many left-wing hipsters in Cairo…

My perspective is very different from the Western liberal (the majority of which have never visited the Middle East or read the Koran). So that begs the question…why are liberals unable to acknowledge Islamic terrorism?

Let me give you the top three reasons:

Liberals Hate White People

Liberals have been trained since birth to hate white people. Kathy Griffin, for example, is a perfect example of how the “down-with-whitey” disease has metastasized. At the recent press conference, she offered the following reason for her decapitated head “joke.”

“I’ve been bullied by older, white men my whole life.”

What she really means is, “I’ve been ignored by older, white men my whole life.” But let’s hold off on the psychoanalysis for the moment (and we are analyzing a psycho, make  no mistake about it).

With her back against the wall, Griffin played the “old white man” card. She did this for one reason – she knows the Weltanschauung of the far left. Everything they believe is centered on a hatred of white men. So the left will overlook what is, essentially, an act of treason against the President. And they’ll repeat the well-worn excuse – the white man did it.

Liberals Believe in Rousseau’s Concept of the Noble Savage

Rousseau coined the term “noble savage.” It’s the idea that the brown peoples of the earth are an idyllic race – they live in harmony with the land, peacefully interacting with butterflies and baby deer. They hold hands and sing in unison. War, slavery, torture…all foreign concepts to them. Sadly, their utopia was overturned when the white Europeans arrived.

Rousseau was…well, misguided.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Pre-Colombian America, as well as tribal Africa, were home to innumerable atrocities. For example, roughly 1/3 of Oregonian Indians were slaves prior to the arrival of the Spanish. Another example can be found in The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano (1789), which provides an account of the Islamic slave trade in Western Africa: i.e. Equiano was stolen from his home by black slave traders, brought to the West African coast, and sold to Europeans.

There was nothing “noble” about Indians enslaving one another, or stealing African children from their beds in the middle of the night. Believing otherwise makes you intellectually inferior…not to mention a liar.

Liberals Don’t Travel to Islamic Countries

Most liberals are single/ugly women; the rest are young people (idealistic) or beta-male simps. These women present themselves as loving and accepting. In reality, they don’t want to visit – much less live in –  the Islamic countries of the world.

When was the last time you heard a liberal woman say, “I’m moving to Qatar!” Or how about, “I can’t wait to spend next summer in Algeria!” That’s a rhetorical question, of course. The answer is never. If they were so concerned about Muslims, then they would visit the Middle East. But they don’t have the courage to go there. So instead, they base their impressions on the small percentage of Muslims that have the money/education to live in the West – a minuscule sampling, at best.

lib meme
The meme that captures is well…

Remember: Liberal women only want to visit affluent areas. For example, look at how many movie stars talked about moving to Canada when Donald Trump won the presidency. Canada…not Bolivia, Senegal, or Mexico. So very brave! Taking a stand against injustice from an air-conditioned coffee house in Vancouver. Or contemplating the horrors of racism from a five-star restaurant in Montreal.


The Middle East has been going downhill since the 7th century (when Islam supplanted the local religions).  It’s now a region that’s dominated by stone-age thinking and brutal ideologies. And most urgently, the pestilence of terrorism.

Only a delusional person could ignore this fact…in other words, a Western liberal.

Economics is Not About Our Hopes and Values

Economics is Not About Our Hopes and Values

A great quote from Thomas Sowell in Basic Economics: A Citizens Guide to the Economy:

Economics is a study of consequences of various ways of allocating scarce resources which have alternative uses. It is not a study of our hopes and values. (p. 3)

You can see why Thomas Sowell is hated by the left (cue the “Uncle Tom” card). For them, economics is all about hopes and values.  Spread sheets don’t matter, budgets don’t matter, and the national debt is irrelevant. It’s all about feelings (cue the violin solo).

Unfortunately, these feelings are based on Cultural Marxism – they hinge on the oppressor/oppressed model. The people that have things are evil; the people that lack things are noble. It’s a children’s fable, akin to Robin Hood – steal from the rich and give to the poor.

Charity is a noble thing – but only to a worthy cause: a child with a cleft palate, a man with no legs, a homeless veteran, etc. The examples are endless. They deserve our sympathy and perhaps (if we can afford it) a monetary handout; but charity to the deserving and only to the deserving.

Life is about the subtle difference. You have to break down the argument, weigh the evidence, and analyze the fact. It’s a time-consuming process. But it’s a critical one, since your personal well-being is at stake.

Can you spot a real victim from a fake one? The charlatan never sleeps…

The Difference Between a Conservative Victory and Liberal Victory

The Difference Between a Conservative Victory and Liberal Victory

Conservative soldier to wife: “Gee honey, you’ll never believe what I did. I single handedly defeated 50 ISIS fighters in a firefight. My courage brought democracy to a small village in the rural mountains of Iraq!”

Wife to husband: “That sounds great, but I have some bad news. Our daughter got two arm-sleeve tattoos and is undergoing sexual reassignment surgery. She says that you have no right to protest because you’re a cisgendered, white male.

The degenerate left will happily take the second victory…and take it all day long. They want your Church, your spouse and your child. They want to poz you with their spiritual sickness. They want to denigrate the fundamental fabric of American society. And they’ve used the public school system, the press and Hollywood as their weapons. For fifty years, they’re been doing a brash, touchdown dance on the football fields of America.

Silly conservatives…they became satisfied with moral victories in distant lands. Meanwhile, while these conservatives were deployed overseas, their homeland was being spiritually sodomized. Their noble land, a country overflowing with natural grandeur, being overtaken by the forces of darkness—the idealistic foot soldiers of the diabolical Max Horkheimer. The degenerate left was laughing in hysterics…the right was too stupid, too riddled with PTSD to ever wake up. Victory was on the way—Hillary would arrive, a proud feminist, to hammer the final nail in the American coffin.

But then they got grabbed by the pussy.

Why do liberals despise President Trump? It’s quite simple—he’s dared to challenge their control of the culture. That’s the liberal sacred cow, their Dome of the Rock. He dared to challenge Rosie O’ Donnell, Meryl Streep and Hamilton—for liberals, these things are 100 times important than the lives of Iraqi children. These “artists” are the conduit for cultural poison. If you remove them, there is no way to denigrate the noble spirit of America.

Never forget—we’re fighting a culture war. If you don’t know what you’re fighting for, then you’ve already lost.