DOES IT MATTER IF SOMEONE IS ANTI-WHITE IF THEY AREN'T ANTI-SEMITIC? | 2002-06-22
Well, it turns out that Arabic terrorists are bad because "They're anti-American and anti-Semitic." Farrakhan and other black separatists were denounced because they were "anti-white and anti-Semitic."
I cannot remember ever hearing anyone denounced for being anti-American or anti-white unless they were also anti-Semitic.
With one exception: For months after the September 11 attack, over two-thirds of the public connected that attack with American support for Israel. So every single commentator assured us that the attack had absolutely nothing to do with Israel (April 6, 2002 - REMEMBER WHEN ISRAEL HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH AMERICA'S MIDDLE EAST PROBLEMS?).
That was the only time I ever saw "anti-American" denounced when it wasn't combined with "and anti-Semitic."
But the establishment line, the line which liberals and respectable conservatives and ALL media commentators follow, is that there is nothing wrong with being anti-white or anti-American as long as you are not against any official minority group.
After all, ALL respectable commentators, right or left, are routinely both anti-American and anti-white.
ALL respectable commentators demand that every white majority, and ONLY white majority countries, be open to third world immigration and to internal integration. This is what "anti-racism" actually means. It never applies to non-white countries. "Anti-racism" is a code word for getting rid of whites.
By the same token, McCain says flatly and all respectable conservatives say implicitly that all minorities should demand open borders for America and that their loyalty should be to other minorities, not to Americans July 14, 2001 - THE FOUNDING FATHERS' PATRIOTISM IS MCAIN'S TREASON).
So you simply do not hear anyone denouncing someone for simply being anti-white or anti-American. They have to be anti-white AND anti-semitic or anti-American AND anti-Semitic.