August 4, 2017

GOP: Zionist base, jihadist elite. Dems: jihadist base, Zionist elite

In the all-out effort to dump H.R. McMaster, a member of the neo-con Pentagon boarding party into the White House, the America-first movement is hammering away at the faultline that I explored in an earlier post and comments. In foreign policy, the GOP coalition is made up of those supporting Zionism (the Cultural Right) and those supporting jihadism (the Pentagon). The Zionist sympathizers come from the electoral base, while the jihadist sympathizers come from an elite power group.

Although the cracks in this coalition may have been there for awhile, they really started to widen before, during, and just after the long Middle East diplomatic trip. Israel got the cold shoulder, while Saudi Arabia got hundreds of billions worth of weapons and the iconic wizard globe picture.

After such a big let-down for the electoral base of the GOP, who were expecting a greater focus on the Holy Land than on decadent sandniggers dancing around with swords, there is a ripe opportunity to weaken base support for the Pentagon brass by driving home how little they care for Israel relative to Jihadi Arabia.

It's damn difficult to get Republicans to sour on the military, but if they see what grand purpose it's being mis-used for, they will totally be on board with shaking up our priorities to something more sensible. And while military priorities are not held by plebiscite, when even the Republican voters start to question the Pentagon's alliance with jihadists, that partnership is not going to last much longer.

This internal contradiction of the GOP is paralleled on the Democrat side as well. Their electoral base (Cultural Left) is aligned with jihadists, or Sunni extremists, as part of their war against Islamophobia -- which is never a "fear" of peaceful Muslims, but only the jihadist types, so that their struggle against Islamophobia enlists Muslim Brotherhood types like Linda Sarsour. But their party's elite power group is Wall Street, which is controlled by Jews rather than Muslims.

If somebody wanted to whip up the Democrat base against their own party's power elite, they could use the natural disgust that extremist Muslims have toward Jews, and say how dare our party be run by Jewish Wall Street. There would have to be some concrete policy Wall Street was pursuing that was against Muslims -- say, investing in Israel and therefore against the Palestinians. The BDS movement to boycott / divest / sanction Israel has mostly targeted another power group in the Democrat coalition that is disproportionately controlled by Jews -- higher ed -- but the logic is the same.

Just like Republicans and the military, you'd think it would be impossible to get hardcore Democrats to turn against academia, but the rapid spread of BDS shows that it can be done if they don't like the ends toward which higher ed is investing its money.

When the elite power groups are faced with the prospect of their electoral bases being totally opposed to the elite policies on a tribal group level, the elite group's first thought is to simply switch bases -- the Pentagon would take the Leftists against Islamophobia from the Democrats, and Wall Street would take the Israel-worshiping Christians from the Republicans.

That degree of re-alignment would take a long time. In the meantime, each power group tries instead to "grow their base" by "reaching across the aisle". McMaster hires a diversity consultant from the Muslim Brotherhood-esque CAIR (per Cernovich), while a university admin advertises its investments in Israel to draw in a larger applicant pool that is moderate and conservative.

Still, these largely amount to token gestures, and the two parties are stuck with the tension between their base and their elite power group.

Especially in a climate of populist uprisings, it looks like the outcome will be the base continuing to put pressure against the senior partners in their coalition, and reforming them from within. It will be Republican voters who turn the Pentagon away from its widespread support for Islamic extremists, and it will be Democrat voters who secure a student loan debt jubilee from the creditor class.


  1. I'm assuming McMaster and that group has their own JIDF/Shareblue style PR set up going because the amount of shilling I see is absolutely ridiculous. Any time over the last few days anything negative about him is brought up on /pol/ (both 4chan and 8chan versions) it gets a lot of bitching about "Cernobitch" and how he's just a "typical alt-lite kike" fleeing from Trump for more shekels.

    Now there's a giant, stickied post on r/The_Donald saying that Trump isn't a bitch and thus doesn't need any advice from Cernovitch and Breitbart, both of which have been very critical regarding McMaster the last few days; I believe a lot of Breitbart News Daily was devoted to callers lambasting McMaster today as well. The shilling is becoming very blatant which I hope is a sign that McMaster is feeling the heat and realizing he may be next on the chopping block.

  2. McMaster does have access to Petraeus' Saudi-funded PR firm (KKR), who plants stories in the media. So they do have a war chest and PR manpower.

    Only problem is that they're targeting the audience of hardcore white nationalist types (what "Alt-Right" now refers to). Those guys are irrelevant, yet have convinced themselves that they were at the forefront of the Trump movement and campaign.

    That was the whole nature of the Clinton backfire -- her team tried to paint anyone who wanted less immigration, Muslim ban, etc., as a literal white nationalist and David Duke supporter. Turns out it's a total normie view, so the normie masses couldn't believe how out-of-touch and slanderous the media and Clinton campaign were.

    The WNs interpreted the mainstream appeal of zero immigration, Muslim ban, etc., as proof that the normies were as focused as the WNs were about race, ethnicity, Jews, etc.

    They overplayed their hand, trying to hog credit and attention, throwing Nazi salutes in public after the election victory -- and getting promptly disavowed by Trump, Bannon, alt media, and 99% of the hardcore Trump supporters.

    They've totally withdrawn into an echo chamber on /pol, Twitter, and select forums, and have no broader outreach or appeal.

    By going all-in on mobilizing outrage among this minuscule group against Cernovich et al, the Deep State has wasted its Wahhabibux. If anything, it has convinced the normies who follow Infowars, Breitbart, etc., that only fringe weirdos are open-minded or supporting of McMaster because at least he's anti-Zionist.

    If any normie clicks on a shill or brainwashed Alt-Right person, and sees a non-ironic call for "white sharia," they're only going to conclude for certain that it's some kind of American ISIS of internet-radicalized puritanical 20-something loner males who are against Cernovich and others.

  3. While the Alt-Right is anti-jihadist as well as anti-Zionist, there is now a binary choice to go easier on one side in order to cut off the other side. Which side are you relatively more against?

    Put to this forced choice test, most of the Alt-Right has failed and prioritized anti-Zionism over anti-jihadism.

    First, that gets backwards who actually drives our imperialist foreign policy. What does Israel get out of our war in Afghanistan, vs. Sunni extremist fellow travelers and patrons in Saudi Arabia? Which country of the two can fly a hijacked plane into the very headquarters of America's military and get off 100% scot free? Who got the far better deal and treatment on the recent Middle East trip? Who has been our ally for longer? Who has oil? And so on and so forth.

    Beyond getting the facts backward, just as a matter of rhetoric and persuasion to a broader audience, which is going to sell better, particularly with Republican and moderate-to-conservative audiences -- siding with jihadism over Zionism, or Zionism over jihadism? They're totally fucking clueless about what message and policy sells outside of their own little WN echo chamber.

    In contrast, there are a good amount of non-Zionist or even anti-Zionist people on the New Right, Cernovich himself being one, me being another. Yet we're willing to ease off of Israel-skepticism temporarily and strategically, if it means we can purge the jihadist sympathizers and active agents from our body politic and from our entire population.

    1. Loved reading this post and your comments, Ag.

      There are two twitter accounts that may fit this bill that I'm aware of. Both, back when I was on there, had been cited as not being who they say they are. Both are pro-McMaster, and one was even anti-Sy Hersh (even if you think Hersh is smoking crack, you don't write a screed *now* that's so long, it actually has a #29 revealing you didn't even bother to listen to the less than 7 minute audio. Transcript even less time. What good does that do!!)

      The screed writer could just be an eccentric boomer, what I assumed, though Ali said he isn't on the level. The other is definitely a manipulator, even got involved with outing pedos and other ingratiating behavior though I don't think he's "bad" or on the other side, but definitely a serious manipulator. He retweets the "eccentric boomer" a lot, by the way.

      I do get the feeling that the faction they represent has zero interest in harming Donald Trump or any other Republican. They want him to succeed, just they want to influence him.

    2. While these facts on Saudi Arabia vs. Israel in terms of influence are true, and Saudi Arabia cannot be dismissed as a trivial player as it is by those in the 100% "it's the Jews" camp, these facts still paint an incomplete picture because you've neglected the soft power side of this dynamic.

      Do the Saudis have more money, more geopolitical relevance to maintaining US domination of the Middle East? Yes. But what don't they have? Soft power.

      The Saudis can spend every cent and every last drop of oil they have, and they're still not going to buy themselves any truly heartfelt friendship from the American people or even from the American elites, much less the kind of brotherhood that America feels toward Israel. Favorite vassal or favorite business partner? That can be bought. But not friendship, and especially not brotherhood.

      That law to let 9/11 victims sue Saudi Arabia? Congress passed it. The same Congress that's currently tossing around the idea of criminalizing BDS. What are the only things that get through Congress with unanimous approval? Condemnation of Russia, support for Israel.

      Here's another thing the Saudis will never be able to buy no matter how many trillions they spend: our respect. They are sandniggers with money. Everyone in our military from top to bottom has complete contempt for them as a militarily useful ally; you will not find anyone but a PR firm arguing that the Saudi armed forces are a force to be reckoned with, not even after they've dumped hundreds of billions into the latest hardware. In their hands, it's junk, and everyone knows it.

      You will not find any 'Arabists' in our military who feel a close camaraderie toward the Saudis after working with them, as there were in the old British Imperial army with T.E. Lawrence, Glubb Pasha, etc.

      You know what you will find instead? A lot of 'Israelists,' a lot of guys who go on and sign up for the IDF or send their sons to do it, a lot of seminars where our guys want to bring in Israelis to show them how things should be done (with counter-terrorism, with intelligence, with policing, etc.)

      Israel in the minds of half of America and nearly 100% of elected officials is all but a 51st state, and for the members of Congress it's effectively a second home state. Saudi Arabia will never be either of those things. They're evil foreigners, and everyone knows it. The most affectionate compliment even their closest partners in the US State would give them is something along the lines of "King Salman'a a son of bitch, but he's our son of a bitch."

    3. As per the "Zionist vs Wahhabist" framing of the McMaster issue, I find it a rather useless and disingenuous one as while there are fault lines in the long run between the two sides, for the time being they effectively want the same thing.

      How is "let's invade Syria and overthrow the Iranian government for Israel" any better than "let's invade Syria and overthrow the Iranian government for Saudi Arabia?"

      That's what Derek Harvey and Ezra Cohen-Watnick were advocating, by the way. Cernovich in his usual baboonish manner thought he was being really clever by throwing the "antisemite" bomb over at McMaster and watching the mob descend on him, but this clever little trick of his for an advantage today is doing potentially immeasurable damage to us in the long run, because what he just did is legitimize a couple of rabid invade-the-world Ziocons as "Trumpists."

      If McMaster is so keen on putting 100,000 troops into Syria as Cernovich claims, why did he purge the two young hotheads who were going around and agitating for us to put boots on the ground against Assad?

      It may be helpful to glance away from what's going on inside of D.C. from time to time and see what's actually going on over there. Which leader just threw a public tantrum over the US-Russia ceasefire agreement in Syria and refused to accept it? Bibi Netanyahu.

      And what has Mohamed bin Salman been up to? He just met with Muqtada al-Sadr (!?).

      Saudi Arabia has its hands full with Yemen and Qatar and seems ready to write off the jihadist campaign in Syria as a loss now that Erdogan came to separate terms with Russia and Iran; now it seems they're angling toward some kind of political settlement with the Shia in Iraq.

      Israel, on the other hand, is the one growing increasingly anxious and hysterical at the prospect of the war in Syria ending because it puts them back in the sights of Hezbollah, the only enemy they don't feel 100% certain they could easily beat.

      Every jihadist defeat in Syria now is making the Saudis feel more and more like throwing down the head towel and saving their cash for a better investment; while every Syrian Army victory is making Israel more and more anxious to find some way to extend the war and keep Hezbollah tied down.

      In 2012 it was Saudi Arabia that wanted us to go in and bail out their jihadist proxies when it was clear the tide was turning against them, while Israel might have preferred not to escalate things in their immediate neighborhood and would rather have let the war burn long and slow.

      Now it's clear though that things have changed and it's the Israelis who have more reason to want a US intervention.

      Saudi Arabia didn't have some raghead insider doing staffing for the Trump Administration, but the Israelis did - see Ira Greenstein for instance, a former energy executive who has business interests in the Golan Heights, and was tasked with hiring people for the Admin.

      With that in mind, I can't see the firing of two "overthrow Assad, overthrow Iran" twerps as bad new. The only good neocon is a dead neocon, let the door open to any and they're going to do start wreaking havoc the way they've always done.

      In light of the fact that this struggle appears to be one between ultra-Zionist neocons and Pentagon PC-cuck neocons (like I said, there are no Arabists in US uniform, I don't buy McMaster as some pawn of Riyadh, just a guy who believes in business as usual), I think the best outcome for us would be perpetual stalemate.

      Would that paralyze our Middle East policy? By all means, let's have paralysis. Once ISIS is mopped up, the best thing we could reasonably hope Trump might do in the region is nothing, seeing that Flynn and Bannon aren't woke to the possibilities of a realignment with the Persians and helped fill the administration with the usual Iran haters.


    2015 1,051,031
    2014 1,016,518
    2013 990,553
    2012 1,031,631
    2011 1,062,040
    2010 1,042,625
    2009 1,130,818
    2008 1,107,126
    2007 1,052,415
    2006 1,266,129
    2005 1,122,257
    2004 957,883
    2003 703,542
    2002 1,059,356
    2001 1,058,902
    2000 841,002
    1999 644,787
    1998 653,206
    1997 797,847
    1996 915,560
    1995 720,177
    1994 803,993
    1993 903,916
    1992 973,445
    1991 1,826,595
    1990 1,535,872
    1989 1,090,172
    1988 641,346

    1990 and '91 are still the all-time highs for legal immigration

    Other notable eras:

    1915 326,700
    1914 1,218,480
    1913 1,197,892
    1912 838,172
    1911 878,587
    1910 1,041,570
    1909 751,786
    1908 782,870
    1907 1,285,349
    1906 1,100,735
    1905 1,026,499
    1904 812,870
    1903 857,046
    1902 648,743

    The foreigner invasion gave one infusion after another into the cheap labor pool and provided ample recruits for crime syndicates. Not to mention increasing the audience for aggressive politics, both of the nativist type and the leftist agitator type (sound familiar?)

    1850 369,980
    1849 297,024
    1848 226,527
    1847 234,968
    1846 154,416
    1845 114,371
    1844 78,615
    1843 52,496
    1842 104,565
    1841 80,289
    1840 84,066
    1839 68,069
    1838 38,914
    1837 79,340
    1836 76,242
    1835 45,374
    1834 65,365
    1833 58,640
    1832 60,482
    1831 22,633
    1830 23,322
    1829 22,520
    1828 27,382
    1827 18,875
    1826 10,837
    1825 10,199
    1824 7,912
    1823 6,354
    1822 6,911
    1821 9,127
    1820 8,385

    The lead-up to the tense 1850's, which would culminate in the Civil war, saw a progressively higher immigration rate.

    Extremely high immigration levels (relative to to the previous era) are a cause and effect of decadent elites.


    This is getting kind of pathetic on McMaster's part though it's interesting to watch the open attempts at divide & conquer being put out. Gee, I wonder who fed Conservative Treehouse the totally legit idea that McMaster gave Susan Rice classified access just so she could have access to information she'd need to defend herself and for no other reason?

    It's kind of frustrating at the same time but it looks as if the Trumpian base (the more normal kind who'd follow Cernovich, Katie McHugh and the like and won't scream about DA JOOZ) isn't falling for it. I only worry about r/The_Donald as it's a giant normie pit stop as well and it's obvious the McMaster team has that place on lock with that bogus thread from earlier today and the "can't criticize Trump, he's always playing 44d chess" mindset of a lot of the posters. Not that I think Trump is free from criticism but the obvious answer is staring those types of people in the face -- that is he's having his arm twisted -- and they refuse to acknowledge it.

    Fun fact too: that statement was given to the New York Times. A statement that sounds nothing like Trump (gun to the head or people writing things in his name) given to the fucking New York Times saying "everything is fine, McMaster is a great guy and also a great friend of Israel and did you know he's the greatest military commander since Napoleon and has sex with many beautiful women every night" sounds totally legit.

  6. I'm agnostic. Not crazy about the people who want war with Iran, not crazy about the people who want war with Russia.

    If nothing else, it's a good check and reminder to the Powers That Be that the People will viciously turn on them if they are perceived as being hostile to Trump. The perception that McMaster is sabotaging Trump is what has caused his current predicament.

    So, yeah, agnostic, but I'm glad it's happening. Trump is being openly dragged through the mud by Washington and these people think we'll just sit on our hands? Not try to get to the bottom of it? Not hold anyone accountable?

    1. Also, Mike Cernovich has brass ones. No matter what at all you think of him, what you thought of him, you cannot deny that the man has heart and is crazy brave.
      Contrast that with the MSM who are too afraid to report about what Sy Hersh said. Nah, he exonerated the DNC in the death of Seth Rich -gave it the coveted Sy Hersh imprimatur- so their silence can't be attributed to partisan hackery. They're skeered. The sheer gulf with respect to bravery between Cernovich (and Julian Assange, Craig Murray, et al.) and the rest of the MSM is breathtaking.

  7. Even more on the McMaster stuff: Reagan Battalion, the Deep State neocon propaganda outlet, is backing up Conservative Treehouse's claims that Rice only got clearance to defend herself so you can safely tuck that away as coming from the McMaster camp and thus a load of BS. They're also trying to claim that the anti-McMaster attacks are being fueled by Bannon (through Breitbart) and also "Russia-alligned twitter users" or whatever garbage.

    Also last week it seems as if McMaster submitted a proposal for a troop surge in Afghanistan that Trump rejected and I'm wondering if that's the source of, or at least part of the reason for, the current rampage McMaster and his camp are going on (smearing the nationalist guys, firing Trump loyalists, the D&C PR campaign on the nationalist right, ousting getting Kelly into the CoS position, etc.).

  8. The assault on McMaster has him wobbly -- his purge has been halted for now, and the best Trump could do on his behalf is issue a short pro forma defense.

    The only item of substance in that defense is that McMaster is very pro-Israel -- proving that the charge of anti-Zionism was the blow that landed the hardest against this jihadist-sympathizing warmonger. Anyone who doubted the utility of that line of attack: pay attention and learn.

    He survives another round, but he won't last many more. Bannon had already worked the body for us, and now the masses themselves connected right on the chin. Before long, he's going down and he's not getting back up. I just hope it comes out in a Trump tweet!

    This is also a strong reminder that since Trump has no leverage within the polity, he has to use us. We went to the polls, we follow and spread his message on social media, and now we're launching a media attack on one of his enemies.

    Good thing he brought Bannon in there with him -- he's the one who can mobilize an organized army of Trump supporters, through the alt / conservative media. Trump could tell his supporters to do something over Twitter, but there's no institutional structure to "people who follow Trump on Twitter". There are such organizations within the nationalist / conservative media.

    1. "..proving that the charge of anti-Zionism was the blow that landed the hardest against this jihadist-sympathizing warmonger. Anyone who doubted the utility of that line of attack: pay attention and learn."

      H.R. "enlist the dykes, just gas the kikes" McMaster
      H.R. "Reindustrialization begins with lampshade factories" McMaster

  9. Re: divide & conquer, most of the 44-D chess people have been that way for awhile, I don't know that the Deep State had to launch a psy-ops to do that. Maybe harden that mindset into place, and amplify the message, but not catalyze it.

    And strikingly -- not spreading that mindset. How can we tell what the average Trump supporter thinks? Just look at the media that has to cater to their beliefs and views. From Alt-Lite people on social media, to Breitbart and Daily Caller, to Infowars, to Laura Ingraham's radio show, to Dobbs / Tucker / Hannity on TV -- they're all reflecting the audience's view that it isn't 44-D chess, that it's a real coup by the Deep State to overturn their vote, and that at best it will sideline Trump's agenda.

    If the audience were so resistant to that idea because they believed in 44-D chess, sleight-of-hand, etc., then none of those media outlets would have much of an audience left.

    Conservative and certainly nationalist media is much more connected to grassroots sentiment, since that audience doesn't want to just imbibe whatever the media elites are telling the nation at large. So we have had a big impact on where those media outlets have gone during and still after the election.

    And of all the various views that were there during the inchoate Trump victory, the two camps that have failed to catch on (as reflected in just about all media reliant on Trump supporters) are the white nationalist / identity over material matters camp, and the Panglossian "never sick of winning" camp.

    You just don't hear either attitude on any of the Trump voter-oriented media outlets.

    Instead it's what is now called Alt-Lite or New Right or nationalist-populist or whatever. Molyneux or Cernovich could go on Tucker and resonate with the national audience, but Richard Spencer or Bill Mitchell could not. They would seem like they were not connected to planet Earth.

    Although he has had Scott Adams, who is about as close as the Alt-Lite gets to the incurably happy-go-lucky Boomer rationalizers. In fairness, Adams focuses just on persuasion, i.e. how the events of the day appear to ordinary Americans -- not the power dynamics of various elite groups, whether or how we're being sucked into a new Cold War, etc.

    And Tucker has had on Michael Tracey and Max Blumenthal, who would choose the Alt-Lite as partners against the elites, rather than the 44-D chess or white nationalist camps.

  10. The main division in beliefs is: Is Trump omnipotent?

    The two camps that have not spread and resonated widely both believe that Trump is omnipotent.

    The Panglossian camp also thinks he's omniscient and omnibenevolent -- he is a literal God-Emperor, and therefore all news is good news for us.

    The white nationalist camp thinks he's omnipotent, but lacking in either or both of the other godlike attributes. Some think he doesn't have all the facts about white nationalism, deep European cultural identity, or whatever other non-material issues. Others think he lacks the good will to deliver on what he knows is the best course -- that he's a cuck, sell-out, neo-con, etc.

    The view that has spread the most widely is that Trump is not omnipotent -- as shown by just about everyone in government, and many in the private sector, ignoring his orders, not respecting his authority and mandate from the voters, and outright sabotaging him. And getting away with it.

    Hardly godlike omnipotence -- but that's to be expected when he is a total outsider and newcomer who entered DC with zero, or negative, political capital.

    We don't have to believe that Trump isn't smashing through his agenda because he lacks knowledge (even though now his info flow is being restricted by CoS General Kelly, it was not before). He showed awareness of what was wrong and what needs to be done during the campaign.

    And we don't have to believe that he doesn't have the right values and motives -- he would never have put everything of his on the line, including his very life and lasting reputation, if he were in the race just to sit around once in office.

    And of course Trump himself is making that picture harder to see, because he would rather die than publicly admit how little authority he evidently has over the government, relative to other Presidents.

    But he doesn't have to tell us himself, the conservative media at all levels is getting the word out, and urging the people to get angry at how little power the Swamp is according the duly elected President.

    Who knows, maybe in the future the view of Trump as Messiah will spread far and wide, being a more compelling narrative. But at least here and now, it's the mundane view of Trump as constrained and even held hostage that is carrying the day.

  11. "Not that I think Trump is free from criticism but the obvious answer is staring those types of people in the face -- that is he's having his arm twisted -- and they refuse to acknowledge it."

    Trump himself said, a few months ago, that being president "was harder than he thought it would be." At the time, I wondered why he would say anything like that, but it seems like he was trying to signal to his supporters that he was being constrained - there is no 44d chess.

  12. McMaster helps kill trade war against China, in fruitless attempt to get their help against NK:

    First, they're not going to sincerely join in any effort against their ally.

    Second, even if they went all the way, China has not managed to control NK for 2000 years.

    Third, the efforts would not even be full-bore -- more useless sanctions from a UN coalition.

    We need to do exactly the opposite -- pull out of SK and Japan, let them figure out their military situation themselves, and then go to trade wars against East Asia in order to re-industrialize our economy.

  13. The threat of East Asia turning into a steaming pile of wartorn wasteland would actually be GREAT incentive to build plants in the US. This would be the time to withdraw as long as Japanese banks stayed invested in US companies

  14. You're not disagreeing with the argument in the post:

    "The Saudis can spend every cent and every last drop of oil they have, and they're still not going to buy themselves any truly heartfelt friendship from the American people or even from the American elites, much less the kind of brotherhood that America feels toward Israel."

    That stems from the fact that Israel appeals to an electoral base, which is larger than the electoral base that is anti-Israel (the anti-Islamophobia Left).

    Saudi having the money, geopolitical appeal, etc., makes it more attractive to an elite power group like the Pentagon than Israel.

    So the Saudis can find favor among the elite power groups in a way they cannot with the general public or any institution that responds more to them than to the elites -- like pop culture, or even Congress when it comes to 9/11 reparations.

    9/11 is not some obscure part of "foreign" policy that the American people don't care about -- it's a deeply domestic issue, and one that has yuge salience and will never be forgotten.

    If you're trying to argue with anything, you're saying it's not worth it to lop off the Saudi influence among the elite -- getting us into all those wars, including Afghanistan, where Israel has had no role, since they only became a client in the '70s -- if that would mean we'd have to accept Israel's continued soft support among the American people.

    Sorry, but that's insane and suicidal. The only nationalist way to resolve that trade-off is to accept suburban Kansans putting up an Israeli flag on their work desk, while getting the hell out of our jihadist-supporting wars.

    If you overtly or tacitly argue for the opposite trade-off, you will strike normal people as just having animus against the Jews per se. You have no elite support, so remember that's who you should be most worried about trying to persuade.

    Otherwise it's just "boo Jews" virtue-signaling to fellow Alt-Righters.

  15. You're wrong about who McMaster is purging -- they may be Iran hawks, but not Syria or Russia or Afghanistan hawks. They are from the Flynn mold. And they are loyal to Trump rather than the Pentagon brass or CIA leadership.

    I wish they were less hawkish on Iran, but again you're suicidally insane to forgo a coalition with them since they're the most numerous bunch who is on our side within the government, who are focused on radical Islam and jihadism (only mistake being they apply it to Shia, whether Hezbollah or Iran), and they are loyal to Trump rather than part of the growing coup against him.

    But hey, they're not 100% pure on the Aryan Motherland, so I guess we gotta let the Pentagon boarding party make them all walk the plank.

  16. Also wrong about the Saudis writing off the war in Syria. They are giving up on the true-believer jihadists, but they are simply re-investing in the Kurds, whose propaganda is now suddenly full of sectarian rhetoric like you expect to come from the Saudis, who are suddenly depositing fat stacks of cash in the Kurdish bank accounts.

    Nor has the US given up on Syria, but are shifting toward making the Kurds their plan B.

    I wrote another post showing how that plan won't work, but when has that ever stopped the morons in the Pentagon or Riyadh?

    So in fact, it's not only Israel who is continuing to agitate against Assad -- Saudi and the Pentagon are still 100% in the same camp, only choosing a different proxy force to do the dirty work (Kurds rather than the rump jihadists).

  17. You're totally worthless if you're willing to shrug your shoulders about McMaster, Kelly, and Mattis seizing more and more control over the government, just because Trump, Flynn, and Bannon are not immediately working toward a re-alignment with Iran.

    I know you're just a 20-something, but you can't think that an alliance with Iran could be achieved anytime in the next 10 years. Even if we had 100% support in America, which we have nothing like, the Iranian leaders are going to take a long time to get over their justified mistrust.

    Meanwhile, the Deep State coup against the only populist-nationalist President and his loyalists is going on RIGHT NOW.

    Do you have any idea how warped your priorities appear to normal Americans, as well as to hardcore Trump supporters?

    I used to say, "You guys can't just sit on the sidelines out of puritanism, all hands on deck!" But the Alt-Right has very few people left by now, and they have no broader influence, appeal, relationships, or other form of political / social capital.

    You've decided to withdraw into an Essene-like purity cult in the Twitter Desert, content to spend most of your time snarking about other Trump loyalists who are actually reaching out to the masses and converting them to the populist-nationalist Gospel.

  18. TFW you shrug off Somali stabbings in your own hometown because your would-be allies in the Crusade might have Israeli flags in their Facebook profile.

  19. It seems as if the elites might have overplayed their hand with the McMaster stuff. Adam Schiff came out earlier in support of him and when the people supporting McMaster are Democrats, RINOs, the establishment media, Deep State propaganda firms and Bill Kristol then it's going to look mighty suspicious to pretty much everyone.

    Even those shilling against Cernovitch earlier this week are starting to turn on McMaster. The lone exception seems to be r/The_Donald where anything related to McMaster is buried and the few comments in threads are screeching about how it's a Cernovitch psy-op or encouraging others to "trust Trump" so it's safe to say the McMaster camp has that place on lock. But most Trump supporters see his support coming exclusively from the globalists and neocons and are thus making decisions on who the true enemy is.


You MUST enter a nickname with the "Name/URL" option if you're not signed in. We can't follow who is saying what if everyone is "Anonymous."