THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

JEWISH REALISTIC | 2006-05-27

Clint Eastwood made a movie called "The Unforgiven."

He had made all those spaghetti westerns and Dirty Harry movies, so Eastwood decided to make a movie that all the critics would think was GREAT.

He did.

You have to give Eastwood credit for knowing what he is doing. He wanted all the critics to say all those other movies were just entertainment, but "The Unforgiven" was The Real Thing.

Keep in mind that the last person who could possibly know what The Real Thing was in the real west would be a New York movie critic.

Have you ever seen a Woodie Allen movie?

Absolutely every single whie person in "The Unforgiven," including the one Clint Eastwood played, was a Woodie Allen clone.

All of them were absolute cowards. Clint's character was a coward until he got drunk.

The only real hero in the movie was Eastwood's Faithful Negro Companion. He never showed an ounce of fear. He was the martyr the evil sheriff totured to death and for whom Eastwood got drunk and killed the white gentiles for.

To say this movie was a critical success is a gross understatement. Whoever and Ebert pronounced it a truly realistic picture of the Old West, with which they were apparently intimately familiar.

Reality, realistic, true to life, all of New York praised the movie.

Eastwood made the movie precisely to get this bunch of retards to say that.

POST TITLELESS - 2006-09-14 | 2006-09-14

not spam

NOT SPAM

What about Halle Berry? She's half white/half black and most

ment find her attractive.

Comment by Mark

ME:

It is generally agredd that driving 120 mph on a crowded highway is dangerous, but many, many people have done it and come out without a scratch.

The odds are against you, and it is an evil thing to do to take that chance with other people's lives.

ISRAEL'S PIT BULL | 2007-01-02

From Stormfront. I don't know if this is OUR Mrk or not, but I am treating it as if it is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlbionMP

Bob,

how high are the stakes for Iran ?

Mark

MY REPLY ON STORMFRONT:

I've given your question a lot of thought.

One point I keep making and people outside my blog ignore is that America is not just the only SUPER power left in the world, it is the only POWER left in the world. Not one other country on the planet projects real military muscle outside its own borders. Hell, France doesn't have control WITHIN its borders.

For this reason, the United States is EXTREMELY dangerous

Never forget the lesson of the Sword of Damocles.

And America is Israel's pit bull.

I don't know if you are old enough to remember when Reagan bombed Libya. The American attack planes were allowed to take off from Thatcher's Britain but they were not allowed to fly over any other country. They made a zigzag around Europe and through the Strait of Gibraltar and returned by the same zigzag route.

All the respectable conservatives are demanding that Bush bomb the nuclear facilities in Iran. I don't know if even Tony Blair would allow the attack planes to take off from Britain. The Iraqi Government now controls its own air space, and they wouldn't.

That could mean that the air assault conservatives demand would be American planes taking off from Israel. Can you imagine the reaction to an air attack on Iran from ISRAEL by the United States?

The usual reaction is to say that the United States couldn't take the heat for that. But let me repeat, THERE IS NO OTHER POWER ON EARTH EXCEPT ISRAEL'S PIT BULL. The United States could invade Iran with the whole world screaming its effeminate little head off.

Don't fool yourself. When it comes to getting out in the field, there is no armed force on earth that face the Americans even briefly. That would mean terrorist attacks, but do you think that is more important in Washington than taking out Iran if Israel REALLY insists on it?

The Sword of Damocles is over Iran.

ALAN: MY WAR EXPERIENCE | 2007-02-23

NOT SPAM

NOT SPAM

Liberal was in fashion when civil rights was pushed along with busing, equality and immigration reform. Once these negative effects of this came forth then the heat was on the "Liberals". This one label carried the stigma of all that went wrong with leftist idealism mentioned above. The "Liberals" became progressives or moderates etc, they figured nobody would notice. The proper conservative was used to save the cultural deviants, if Bob Dole was seen along side Ted Kennedy then he must not be all that bad so it goes. Every time these SOB's are on the ropes it's somebody on the other side that saves the "Liberals", why not, the propers would have to behave like all the others who are never allowed on TV.

Comment by Alan

ME:

Anti-racists today are in EXACTLY the position liberals were in in the period you talk abut, when they got discredited. "There is no room for racism in American society" is phrase you hear less of today. People are EXPERIENCING what it means. It means suppression of all opposition, which is what liberalism came to mean in the 60s.

It took quite a while for people to even begin to attack the holy word "liberal." It had been a mantra for a full generation. But it critically important that I now find that EVERYBODY laughs when I say "anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews." People would have seamed bloody murder if I had said that before 1980. I am attacking what WAS a Holy Mantra. Now it is laughing stock.

The trick is knowing WHEN that turning-point has come.

I did a piece recently on white's right to discriminate. The brilliance of this argument IS NOT THE ARGUMENT. I will get people chiming in and saying I am RIGHT. But as I keep complaining, that precisely misses the point. We were RIGHT when we said the white man made life worth living in the 1920s. It does not matter that I'M RIGHT.

What MATTERS if the TIMING.

I have had to wait all these years for the antis to go too far. Now THEY are demanding reparations. Now THEY are saying whole races deserve things. Now the whole Ex Oriente Lux crap, where we all owed everything to Moses and Pharaohs, is collapsing. NOW we can attack and state flatly what WE have a right to.

War or politics, which is the same thing, is a matter of TIMING. When I was saying that integration was aimed at genocide in the 1950s, I was RIGHT, but Norman Rockwell was portraying people like me as an attack on little black girls being protected by troops as they entered white schools surrounded by Evil Rednecks. Now it is OBVIOUS genocide.

NOW is the TIME.

But every time I mention the WWII generation and the example of moral cowards just like them in the Catholic hierarchy who played the Godfather to priest who raped little boys, every reply I get is abut what people are used to talking about: homosexuality in the priesthood. That not only has nothing to do with my point, it TRIVIALIZES what I am telling you.

Which is why Mark is so pissed, thought he has a lot to learn from me, too. The simple fact was that in 1968 we cold have DESTRYED liberalism. Humphrey was down to 29% in the polls, and his working-class anti-liberals and Republicans anti-liberals were ready to stomp them into the dust. Mark, can you imagine that I spent TWELVE YEARS in rug-chewing fury while these dolts slowly, slowly got together against the common enemy?

First the enemy does what Alan said. His REAL motives become so clear nobody can miss them. But that is not enough. THEN the whole establishment which has been opposing them has to slowly, glacially, begin to realize it is time for ATTACK. All the subtlety and survival tactics they used before are out of date. It takes a LONG time to get this across.

But I have been this way before.

First the enemy makes his motives so clear nobody can miss them any more. THEN those who have led the moderate response, who are the spokesmen of the opposition, have to be replaced. Reagan lost the nomination fight in 1976.

I am STILL trying to get across to BLOGGERS what the FIRST step is. I am hitting on the second with "respectable conservatives."

This really bothers me for a very good reason. If you NEVER get over the idea that my exposure of moral cowardice dealing with boy rapes in the Catholic Church and its relevance to the Greatest Generation -- and THAT was a wild overstepping that generation gave us to hit them with – how am I EVER going to want you against Step Three?

All those clever people who kept control of the anti-liberals didn't just get mad and go home, the way Mark sounds like he is doing. They invented Neoconservatism. Now the neoconservatives have us in Iraq in EXACTLY the same way that EXACTLY the same kind of people who got us into Vietnam.

I have made that point several times, but all I get is responses about how Jewish they are and other standard stuff.

Please LISTEN to me! This war will be won. I saw the same war before. But paleoconservatives won the war and lost the peace.

REPEAT: We won the war but we can lose the peace and right back where we were AGAIN. And conservatives did it by going back to the same old crap like a bitch to her vomit.

If you want to WIN, and STAY won, get off the old crap and GET MY POINTS!