Dieudonne Mocks Holocaust Inc., Not Holocaust

In this interview on Iranian TV, Dieudonne describes how he and his wife and children have been physically assaulted by Zionists for his satire.

None of that harassment has been reported widely. While the world has been forced to listen to endless nonsense about the faux-martyrdoms of operatives like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, someone who really gets beaten up for his political views gets no sympathy.

The comedian also explains why breaking the  taboo against criticizing Zionism is indispensable to releasing the West from the psychic prison in which it lives.

He explains the difference between mocking the political and commercial manipulation of the Holocaust (which he admits to doing)

and mocking the Holocaust itself (which he denies doing).

He points out that in France, in recent  years, the Crucifixion has been forcibly and intentionally displaced by the Holocaust as a symbol deserving public veneration.

[See my post on Pope Francis and the Marc Chagall painting of Christ.]

Indeed, the increasing proliferation of laws supporting the inviolability of Holocaust history in France and elsewhere coincides with the increasing denigration and displacement of Christian symbols.

That displacement is nothing less than cultural imperialism.

Is one human race to replace divinity itself in the public consciousness of another?

If so, by whose will? At whose expense?

In another post I will explain why I still wonder if Dieudonne is yet another face of controlled opposition, but, in regard to the question of whether he is guilty of incitement, the answer is no.

One last point. He was convicted not of “inciting violence,” which is at least a crime, even if  he didn’t commit it.

No, he was charged with something quite different, nebulous, and trumped up “inciting hate.”

Quite apart from the astounding hypocrisy of  such a statement from the West – always boiling over with barbaric ‘two-minute-hates’ (here and here  for instance) directed at this or that unfortunate people who get in the way of its imperial ambitions –  what does inciting hate even mean?

Really, what does it mean?

 

 

 

 

Christ-Hating Zios & Shabbos Goyim

From Mask of Zion:

So when the ostensibly “Christian” British state, known and hated the world over for its “Christian” missionary activities that cloaked so many if not all of its genocidal invasions, chucks its “Christian” identity to the wayside and castigates a man like Dieudonné, who identifies himself as an “Islamic-Christian (23)”, while welcoming filth-peddlers and desecrationists like Sarah Silverman and Larry David, it is betraying an upsetting truth that many Brits may not be able to accept: Their country is not the great power that they’ve been brainwashed into believing it is since birth. Their country is a subcontractor for a far more powerful, far more sinister force. Their country is not Christian. Their country has no love or respect for Jesus Christ The Messiah. Their country is not sovereign. Their country is on its knees, its forehead at the feet of the Rothschilds and other “chosenite” overlords. Their country is subservient to Jewish supremacy.

As is America. The US and UK regimes are empires and imperialists only in name, for they do not serve their own interests but the interests of Organized Jewry, which sends its Christ-hating spokespersons into the public eye to bash and humiliate what they allegedly hold most dear while they remain deafeningly silent. But when opponents of Zionist-subverted Western policy criticize the parasitic, plutocratic elite running the West into the ground, they are not greeted with the same silence. They are not even greeted with accusations of “anti-Westernism”. No, they are bombarded with the gobbledegook of “anti-Semitism”. Pounded with the sheer irrationalness of “Jew-hatred”. Browbeaten for spitting on the “memory” of the “Holocaust”. This is not just an exercise in hypocrisy alone. Hypocrisy represents the mere obviousness of the matter. This is proof, the kind comprised of unbreakable stone embedded in unshakeable ground, that imperialism, while a terribly real threat that must be combated and stopped, is only vice president in the hegemonic power structure; its agents are “shabbos goyim” and its boss is Zionism. “

A Reader’s Tip

One reader suggests that the attacks against Christian apologist Dinesh D’Souza are part of the on-going psychological war on America’s ostensible ally in Asia, India.

I’ll follow up on that when I’ve had time to get into the whole story. D’Souza, from my perspective, isn’t an Indian public figure in the US I feel compelled to support, given that he’s spent his whole career telling American conservatives what they want to hear…or think they want to hear…misrepresenting many things about his country of origin in his eagerness to please his country of adoption.

But, in the end, what did it get him?

A hard-core of conservatives are also nativists and racialists and they would never accept a dark-skinned Indian man as one of them, no matter how thoughtfully he argued or how faithfully he defended their interests.

And D’Souza didn’t always argue thoughtfully, although almost always with insight.

He often took cheap shots at liberals and the left, for one thing, which discredited his other positions.

Hitting the left accurately where it hurts is fine, but tarring the many decent left-libertarians, anti-imperialists, and humanitarians, who for one reason or other call themselves leftists or liberals, is foolish and wrong.

Remember, the rule in American politics is that if you’re a conservative, you get handled worse if you also happen to be a minority.

It’s as though the media establishment sees people who go against their natural interests as some kind of traitor rather than just intellectually non-conformist.

 

“Conservative” Catholic Papers Fire Pope Critics

First Things,” a conservative Catholic paper, has fired Maureen Mullarkey for criticizing Pope Francis, going to the extent of publicly ridiculing her conservative views.

Other supposedly conservative Catholic papers have also fired Pope Francis detractors:

Adam Shaw, a Fox news website editor, was fired from a Catholic News Service gig.

The National Catholic Register has fired Patrick Archbold, using liberal talking-points to make its case.

Why are all these “conservative” Catholics suddenly so eager to echo the Liberal party-line?

Were they ever real conservatives?

Are they under pressure from bigger bosses?

Are we only now finding out the extent of the subversion and infiltration of conservative Catholic circles at the behest of the ruling cabal?

As a non-Catholic, I can only feel intensely sorry for traditionalists of that faith.

And more than ever I am thankful that I have never  put all my faith “in princes nor in the son of man,” no, not even (or, maybe, especially) when they claim to speak infallibly.

Note:

I really do not have a major problem with the content of most of what Pope Francis has said publicly (from urging people to care about the poor, to supporting refugees, to asking us to care about the environment).

What I don’t like is the overwhelming priority he has given to these social issues over reaffirming the Church’s teachings on the family and on sexuality….a reaffirmation that is much more needed than the repetition of concerns voiced often enough by political groups.

Even Francis’ social teaching is marred by his ignorance of economic science and his partisanship on man-made global warming.

And all of his exhortations ring hollow when you realize how closely they follow the globalist agenda that is pushed by the intelligence agencies.