go home Genocide

The Occidental Observer July 2017

THE JEWISH WAR ON WHITE AUSTRALIA

BRENTON SANDERSON

Anti-Defamation Commission The Australian Anti-Defamation Commission (ADC) is the Australian equivalent of America’s Anti-Defamation League (ADL). Both organizations fall under the umbrella of B’nai B’rith International which holds NGO status at the United Nations. The stated mission of the ADC is to make Australia “a better place” by fighting “anti-Semitism and all forms of racism” and combatting “the defamation of the Jewish people and Israel.” Describing itself as a “harm prevention charity,” the ADC claims to be dedicated to “promoting tolerance, justice and multiculturalism.” But despite its pious pretentions to universal benevolence, the ADC, like countless other Jewish activist organizations around the world, exists to promote the ethnic interests of Jews. The “harm” this organization is determined to prevent is any harm to these perceived interests.

Regarding the plethora of Jewish activist organizations in the United States, the Jewish academic and journalist Adam Garfinkle has observed:

The main mass-membership advocacy organizations of American Jewry — B’nai B’rith and its Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the American Jewish Congress, the American Jewish Committee, the Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds, the National Conference of Jewish Federations, and the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations (a kind of steering group for the major organizations), to mention only a few — are not religious organizations but ethnic ones. It is not necessary to have any Jewish religious affiliation to be a member in good standing in these organizations, and their leaderships are composed mainly of people who are not religious or Jewishly learned Jews.

We need not go into foundational texts and statements of purpose on the question of origins, for the answer is simple enough: organizations like B'nai B'rith and the American Jewish Committee were created to lobby for particular Jewish interests. … In time, these and most other Jewish organizations became explicitly or implicitly Zionist, and thereafter existed to one degree or another to support, first, a Jewish home in Palestine, and then, after 1948, the security and prosperity of the State of Israel. In other words, all these organizations have depended, and still depend, on the validity of their serving parochial Jewish ethnic interests that are simultaneously distinct from the broader American interest but not related directly to religion. [Emphasis added][1]

ADC: Immigration for Australia but not for Israel
... EXCEPT IN ISRAEL.
Contrary to the propaganda put out by the ADC for non-Jewish consumption, the interests of Jews are not the same as those of the broader Australian community, particularly the White Australian community. While the ADC—whose motto is "Promoting Diversity"— pretends that all conflicting group interests can be reconciled through "education" and "mutual understanding," the interests of different racial and religious groups are often fundamentally opposed and irreconcilable.

The group evolutionary interests of White Australians are absolutely harmed by the mass importation of non-Whites into the country — compounded by ideological commitments by state and federal governments to "diversity" and "multiculturalism."

Results from the 2016 Australian Census recently revealed that, for the first time, the country is receiving more migrants from Asia than Europe. In the past five years, China and India have been the largest sources of migrants, with China, India, the Philippines, Vietnam and Malaysia now accounting for more foreign-born residents than the traditional sources of England, New Zealand and mainland Europe. In response to these figures, Melbourne's thankfully failing Cultural Marxist newspaper The Age exulted that "Australia has reached a welcome tipping point." Noting it had become "unrecognizable from the country portrayed in the 1966 census," it celebrated the fact that Australia is now "more Asian, less Christian and more openly gay."

The Daily Telegraph observed that "the incredible boom in Asian migration has changed the face of Sydney," noting that in the past 25 years the percentage of overseas-born residents from China has risen "an incredible 500 per cent" to now make up 4.7 per cent of Sydney's 4.8 million people, overtaking those born in England (3.1 percent). The latest census results also revealed the Muslim population of Australia has jumped 77 per cent in a decade to more than 600,000. The Australian noted that "If current trends continue, a majority Christian nation will almost certainly no longer exist come the next census in five years. Muslims and Hindus in Australia are themselves powered by immigration which has seen the share of Australians born overseas jump to a third."

The question of why White Australians should welcome this rapid dilution of their genetic line and associated decline in political and cultural influence, is ignored, aside from the usual vague assurances that Australia's "prosperity" is "fuelled by our changing cultural and ethnic make-up," which has "enriched Australia economically and socially." Ann Coulter once noted how if this sort of drastic change were legally imposed on any group other than Whites "it would be called genocide. Yet Whites are called racists merely for mentioning the fact that current immigration law is intentionally designed to reduce their percentage in the population."

Reaching this demographic tipping point is the desired culmination of the Jewish-led abandonment of the White Australia policy. The former national editor of the Australian Jewish News, Dan Goldberg, proudly acknowledged that "Jews were instrumental in leading the crusade against the White Australia policy, a series of laws from 1901 to 1973 that restricted non-White immigration to Australia." Australia's current immigration and refugee policies, left unchecked, will ensure White Australians are progressively replaced in the country their ancestors created by groups with higher fertility and often an abiding antipathy to the founding stock. Whites are already minorities in several suburbs of Melbourne and Sydney and face declining living standards as crime grows exponentially, housing affordability deteriorates, infrastructure is strained, and taxes rise to fund burgeoning public spending directed disproportionately to migrants and refugees from the Middle East and Africa. Meanwhile, non-White groups that are economically self-sufficient, like the Chinese, increasingly dominate the best schools and universities, jeopardizing White Australians' access to professional employment opportunities. They have also pushed home ownership out of reach for millions through buying up Australian real estate.

The ADC only recognizes that group interests can be irreconcilable when it comes to the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians. Here their ostensible commitment to "inclusion," "diversity" and "multiculturalism" gives way to hardnosed biological realism, and the virtues of a "two-state solution" are trumpeted. This is disingenuous posturing, of course, because the ADC fully supports the ongoing expansion of Israeli settlements which will ensure that a "two-state solution" can never be achieved. The problem with Israel adopting the diverse, multicultural approach to nation-building so zealously advocated by the ADC for Australia (and the entire West) is that while it may sound “simple and fair,” it is actually “code for the destruction of Israel and its replacement with a majority Palestinian state.” The ADC insists that “It is naïve and dangerous to believe such a situation will not occur if Israel is taken over by a growing Palestinian population.” The organization has never condemned Israel’s Jews-only immigration policy as “racist” or “bigoted.”

…except in Israel

Instead, the ADC fiercely defends the ethno-nationalist state of Israel, and responds indignantly to all criticisms of the Israeli government, regardless of how merited. The organization is unabashedly committed to ensuring that Israel becomes more ethnically Jewish with each census. Its pro-Israel bias is so extreme that even the Jewish lawyer Michael Brull was moved to note that "The ADC is not an anti-racist group. It is a group that aims to peddle Israeli propaganda. Presumably, the think they might lose some of their credibility if they called themselves the "Pro-Defamation Commission That Supports the Israeli Government in Whatever it Does and Thinks Anyone Who Disagrees Exhibits Prejudice and Causes Anti-Semitism."”

The ADC certainly cannot be accused of duel loyalty. When Israel was caught in 2010 using faked Australian passports to conduct covert operations around the world (including the assassination of Hamas leader Mahmoud Al Mabhouh), then Australian Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, observed that “we do not regard these actions as the actions of a friend.” The ADC, in its singular refusal to condemn Israel’s actions (which seriously endangered all Australian passport-holders), tacitly pledged its undivided and unconditional allegiance to the Jewish state.

One of the faked Australian passports Israel used to assassinate Mahmoud Al Mabhouh in 2010

One searches in vain through the assorted propaganda on the ADC’s website for any acknowledgement that Israel was founded on terrorism and ethnic cleansing in which Palestinians were killed or violently driven from land they occupied for millennia to make way for Jewish settlers, or that Israel’s immigration policy openly discriminates against non-Jews, or that Israel bans marriage between Jews and non-Jews (which is subject to a two-year prison term), or that Israel has a two-tier political and legal system akin to the old South African apartheid. Instead one finds a statement defending Zionism as the "belief that Jewish people, like all other peoples, have the right to self-determination in a country of their own." The mendacity of this statement should be clear to anyone. The ADC and other Jewish activist organizations in Australia, the United States, and throughout the West absolutely deny the right of White people anywhere to self-determination.

ADC chairman Avril Abramovich
ADC Chairman Avril Abramovich

Every year the chairman of the ADC, Dvir Abramovich, hails the anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel. Despite it having one of the lowest asylum-seeker acceptance rates in the world, he extols the "Jewish state" for "putting out the welcome mat to refugees, traumatized survivors and victims of anti-Semitism" and for being "a thriving, free and tolerant state" that "comprises a multitude of ethnic and religious groups whose cultural and artistic diversity add to the country's spirituality and creativity." He naturally declines to mention that this diverse "multitude" are all Jews. He also neglects to mention that Israel's treatment of African and other non-Jewish refugees is far from "welcoming" or "tolerant." As the New York Times reported in 2015:

ADC Chmn Dvir Abramovich: Israel's policy toward African asylum seekers is to pressure them to self-deport or, as the former interior minister Eli Yishai put it, to "make their lives miserable" until they give up and let the government deport them. … A law passed in 2013 requires male African asylum seekers already in Israel to be detained automatically and indefinitely in the open detention center, Holov, in the Negev desert. The detainees are allowed to wander the desert between three obligatory check-ins every day, and they must remain in Holov overnight. If they miss a check-in, they can be transferred to the nearby prison. Their only alternative is to accept a sum of $3,500 to return to their country of origin, or a third country, usually Uganda or Rwanda, often without proper documentation to stay. … Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu once warned that the arrival of African people poses a demographic risk to Israel: "If we don"t stop their entry, the problem that currently stands at 60,000 could grow to 600,000, and that threatens our existence as a Jewish and democratic state."

Abramovich recently joined the chorus of Jewish leaders (and the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society) decrying the attempt by a democratically-elected President of the United States to restrict travel from six Muslim-majority nations. He endorsed a plea by Commonwealth Chief Rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis, for President Trump to stop discriminating against people on the basis of nationality and religion. Executive Council of Australian Jewry leaders Anton Block and Peter Wertheim chimed in, saying they deplored any policies or remarks that “preference native-born citizens to naturalized migrants,” claiming that “such rhetoric or policy is self-defeating and harmful.” Colin Rubinstein, the executive director the Australia Israel Jewish Affairs Council called Trump’s policy “morally unacceptable and counterproductive.” Yet all of these individuals fully support the Israeli government’s decision to block all Syrian refugees, and Wertheim is more than happy to preference his own ethnic group in Israel, slamming as a “disgraceful falsehood” any claim that Jews displaced Palestinians from their land on the basis that Jews “are indigenous to the Holy Land.”

As always, these Jewish activists play ethnic hardball when it comes to Israel, but sanctimoniously deny the irreconcilability of the competing interests of the various ethnic and religious groups that now make up Western nations.

Jewish & Australian flags combinationGiven the ADC’s fervent advocacy for Israel, despite that nation’s harshly-restrictive policies toward African and all other non-Jewish migrants and refugees, Abramovich’s (and the ADC’s) sanctimonious words about the virtues of “diversity” and “multiculturalism” are exposed for what they are: a rhetorical mask for ethnic aggression against White Australians. The ADC promotes pluralism and diversity and encourages the dissolution of the racial and ethnic identification of White Australians, while encouraging Jews to maintain precisely the kind of intense group solidarity they decry as immoral in Whites. Activist Jews have initiated and led movements that have discredited the traditional foundations of Western society: patriotism, the Christian basis for morality, social homogeneity, and sexual restraint. At the same time, within their own communities, they have supported the very institutions they have attacked in Western societies.

Of course, calling them out for their obvious hypocrisy only prompts hysterical cries of “anti-Semitism.”

ADC media-monitoring and propaganda in Australian schools

One of the ways that ethnic groups compete is through controlling what goes into the minds of their competitors. That is why Jews always seek to control the media and entertainment industries — so they can fill the heads of their ethnic rivals with maladaptive ideas that harm them and which, as a result, help Jews to thrive. Prior to the unmediated peer-to-peer communication offered by the internet, all mainstream political discourse passed through a Jewish media filter (or at least a media filter subservient to Jewish interests). Jews are the only people that, except for the internet, control the flow of information throughout the West, and have a profound need to do so. When Jewish motivations and behavior become widely known, anti-Jewish sentiment inevitably rises.

Jews are not majority shareholders in the two largest media companies in Australia, Fairfax and News Limited. Despite this, they have a large journalistic presence at both organizations, and both companies syndicate material from Jewish-controlled and left-leaning media companies. Fairfax syndicates content from the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Reuters (headed by President and Editor-in-Chief Stephen J. Adler), while News Limited syndicates content from the Associated Press (headed by Chairman Steven R. Swartz). Both media companies also provide a regular public platform for the various leaders of Australia’s Jewish activist organizations, including Dvir Abramovich, Colin Rubinstein, Vic Alhadeff, Peter Wertheim, and Mark Liebler.

The ADC assiduously monitors the Australian media, attacking those who stray outside the bounds of Jewish-approved speech in criticizing Israel, multiculturalism, or blaspheming against “the Holocaust.” It lodges formal complaints to employers if an insufficiently penitent response (i.e. an abject apology) is not forthcoming. Such an apology was recently obtained from federal MP George Christensen after the ADC attacked him for appearing on the Alt-Right podcast The Dingoes. Satisfied with Christensen’s apparent repentance, ADC chairman Dvir Abramovich declared that he was “heartened that Mr Christensen has finally owned up to the fact that his appearance on the Dingoes Podcast was a mistake that only legitimized racist rhetoric, and his apology sounds sincere.”

Another important part of the Jewish matrix of power in Australia is the media infrastructure created by the multimillionaire property developer and publisher Morris (Morrie) Schwartz. This Jewish media mogul, who migrated to Australia from Hungary via Israel, is the proprietor behind Black Inc. publishing, the left-wing journals The Monthly and Quarterly Essay (which have been called “the most powerful left-wing voices in Australia”), and The Saturday Paper. Schwartz’s various media organs churn out a never ending stream of articles indignantly demanding that Australia dramatically increase its refugee intake and end the off-shore processing of asylum-seekers.

Conspicuously absent from these same media organs, however, is any discussion (let alone critique) of Israel’s brutal treatment of the Palestinians, or its unaccommodating policies toward all non-Jewish refugees and asylum-seekers. The slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza in 2014 went totally unreported across Schwartz’s media empire. One commentator observed that while the Schwartz publications are full of articles about “indigenous rights, climate change, [and] asylum-seeker policy” they were “shamefully silent” when it came to “Israel’s assault on the Palestinians.” A former editor and staff writer at The Monthly explained that when working under

Morrie Schwartz at Black Inc. or The Monthly, you work very closely with the publisher and things do get spiked and you have raving rows about what goes through and what doesn’t and there are certain glass walls set by the publisher that you can’t go outside of and … one of those is Palestine. I mean it’s seen as a left-wing publication, but the publisher is very right-wing on Israel. … And he’s very much to the, you know, Benjamin Netanyahu end of politics. So you can’t touch it: just don’t touch it. It’s a glass wall.    

In her profile of Schwartz for The Australian, journalist Kate Legge noted that “everyone says Schwartz responds viscerally” to all issues concerning Israel. She quotes his close friend, the Jewish academic Robert Manne, who pointed out that “Loyalty to the idea of a Jewish homeland is very important to him.” Former editor of The Monthly, Peter Craven, observed that: “He’s very one-eyed on these sort of things. I once said to [his wife] Anna that I was going to see [the Wagner opera] Tristan and Isolde and she said, “Peter. I won’t even buy German goods.” Schwartz’s sister-in-law, Carol Schwartz, was recently appointed to the board of the Reserve Bank of Australia.

Organized Jewry also exerts leverage on Australian journalists through the Australia Israel Cultural Exchange (AICE) program, launched in 2002 by Benjamin Netanyahu at the instigation of the Australian Jewish property developer and fervent Zionist Albert Dadon. Related by marriage to Morrie Schwartz, Dadon was former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s “most trusted kitchen cabinet advisor on Israel.” The AICE arranges and funds trips to Israel for politicians, senior journalists, trade union leaders and other important decision-makers. The journalists involved (which have included News Limited journalists Greg Sheridan, Andrew Bolt, Rita Panahi, and Janet Albrechtsen) are lavished with hospitality in Israel and intensively propagandized by the Zionist establishment there. The goal is to foster a sense of obligation and loyalty to Israel which is, in turn, reflected in these journalists’ strict adherence to a pro-Jewish and pro-Zionist line. The only real “exchange” involved with this program is journalists trading their intellectual integrity for the strategically-bestowed hospitality of organized Jewry. Lawyer and journalist Greg Barns noted the obvious parallels between the old Soviet Union and the Israel Lobby in their courting of Western journalists:

Back in the days when the hammer and sickle flew proudly, the Soviet Union would spend big dollars on paying for journalists, academics and diplomats to see for themselves the “workers’ paradise.” It was part of a long term and relentless strategy by the Communists to win the propaganda war against the West. Today the heirs and successors of those Soviet-sympathising journalists head to Israel. … The Israelis have clearly learnt a thing or two from the Soviets. They understand how important it is to roll out the red carpet for the media, by offering them carefully choreographed trips to Israel and in return ensure that their spin on events is planted in the minds of the Western media.

The Israelis also know that they have the upper hand in this game, because the impoverished Palestinians will not be able to outdo them when it comes to lavishing hospitality on a willing media. That the Israeli propaganda strategy of handpicking journalists and others to come to Israel works was made abundantly clear when The Australian’s Janet Albrechtsen visited Israel last November as a guest of the Israeli government and the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies. …

Albrechtsen is not alone in being feted by the Israeli propaganda machine. The Sydney Morning Herald’s Paul Sheehan is another. Just as the Soviets carefully selected the journalists they wanted to show around the country, so is the case with the Israelis. The Soviets would go for leftist sympathizers in papers such as the New York Times, The Guardian and other influential mastheads. The Israelis also favour sympathetic writers. Greg Sheridan as recently as May 6 was comforting poor Israel because “second to the US, Israel is the most acute object of the hostility to the West that flourishes in Western intellectual life.” One is tempted to evoke the immortal phrase “useful idiots,” attributed to Lenin, and used against Western journalists who fell for Soviet propaganda in the 1930s, to describe Western journalists who accept paid trips from the Israeli authorities.

It’s not only journalists who are targeted with these elaborate bribery schemes. During the last Australian Parliamentary term (2013-2016), Israel sponsored more foreign trips for members of the House of Representatives than any other country. Former Australian Foreign Minister Bob Carr observed in 2014 that Australia’s foreign policy (particularly with regard to the Middle East) was being virtually dictated by organized Jewry. Speaking to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Carr hit out at the “pro-Israel lobby in Melbourne,” saying it wielded “extraordinary influence” on Australia’s foreign policy during his time in Julia Gillard’s cabinet.  As The Guardian reported:

Asked about the comments by the ABC’s 7.30 he said: “Certainly they enjoyed extraordinary influence. I had to resist it and my book tells the story of that resistance. … It needs to be highlighted because I think it reached a very unhealthy level.” Asked how the lobby achieved this influence he said: “I think party donations and a program of giving trips to MPs and journalists to Israel. But that’s not to condemn them. I mean, other interest groups do the same thing. But it needs to be highlighted because I think it reached a very unhealthy level.”

Despite all the foregoing, the advent of the internet has seriously undermined the capacity of Jews to comprehensively regulate public discourse in their own interests. Organized Jewry in Australia has responded to this disturbing development with a multifaceted approach. They have lobbied aggressively for the enactment and extension of Orwellian “hate speech” laws (like the notorious Section 18C of Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act) to counteract “online abuse.” Abramovich claimssuch laws “are a vital and necessary tool in addressing and countering the unique harm caused by bias-motivated hate speech.” In addition, the ADC has launched various “educational” programs in schools like “Click against Hate,” which is an “early intervention” program for goyish schoolchildren from Years 5 to 10. The program is offered free of charge to schools as a result of funding provided by billionaire Jewish property developer (and ardent Zionist) John Gandel.

John Gandel (center right) and ADC chairman Dvir Abramovich (far right)

Gandel also happens to fund Taglit-Birthright Israel, a program that provides free ten-day tours of Israel for young Jews  who are “currently unaffiliated with the Jewish community and have never visited Israel.” Announcing the funding, Gandel declared that “My family strongly believes in supporting a range of programs that can foster and enhance Jewish continuity and identity, and help develop the future leaders in our community.” The Zionist Federation of Australia thanked Gandel and extoled Taglit-Birthright Israel as “a critically important Israel program” that serves to “engage many young Jewish adults with the powerful connection to Israel, Judaism and other young Jews they meet during and after the program.” Thus, while seeking to increase Jewish ethnocentrism and ethno-nationalism through his funding of Taglit-Birthright Israel, Gandel simultaneously funds “Click Against Hate,” a program specifically designed by the ADC to reduce White ethnocentrism and promote the virtues of “diversity” and “multiculturalism” among Australian schoolchildren.

According to the ADC’s website, “Click Against Hate” teaches  students “to deal with a wide range of issues including: identity theft, invasion of privacy, cyber bullying, incitement, defamation, online dangers, YouTube and Facebook reporting, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, racism, homophobia, freedom of speech, vilification, obscenity, contempt of court, website reliability, primary and secondary sources.” Under the guise of an educational program designed to promote cyber-safety and pro-social behaviour, “Click Against Hate” pushes a Jewish ethno-political agenda entirely contrary to the interests of the White Australian children involved. It promotes feelings of guilt and shame in White children, and foments grievance among non-White children — encouraging them to join Jews in mounting moral critiques of White Australian society and history. I recently obtained a recording made by a disgruntled student of a “Click Against Hate” session. In the subsequent parts of this article, I provide excerpts from this session together with my observations and comments.


[1] Adam Garfinkle, Jewcentricity: why the Jews are praised, blamed, and used to explain just about everything (Hoboken NJ: John Wiley, 2009), 167-68.

Part 2 of 4

As discussed in Part 1 of this article, “Click Against Hate” was devised by the Anti-Defamation Commission (ADC) as an “early-intervention” program for Australian schoolchildren. I was recently forwarded a recording of a “Click Against Hate” session conducted by a Jewish activist named Brett Kaye (featured in the above photograph). At no point during the session does Kaye acknowledge that he represents the ADC, a Jewish activist organization. Instead he presents himself as a deeply moral and caring person who is involved in the program for purely humanitarian and altruistic reasons. In concealing his organizational affiliation, the children remain oblivious that “Click Against Hate” is not a politically neutral cyber-safety and anti-bullying program, but a carefully designed propaganda tool designed to serve Jewish ethnic interests in promoting “diversity,” “multiculturalism,” and the suppression of “hate” speech (i.e., speech professional Jews don’t like).

Kaye asks the children why they hate someone and they volunteer a variety of answers, such as jealousy and doing something bad to you. So he gives them a hint at what he is really after:

EXCERPT 1: “Psychologist time”

Brett Kaye: I’m gonna ask you a question that’s gonna help you: “Why would I hate somebody because of the color of their skin or because of their religion? Why would I hate somebody because the color of their skin or because of their religion? Why would I?

Child: Because of racism?

Brett Kaye: Yes. Why would I be racist?

Child: Because you were brought up not to like these people

Brett Kaye: AH! So my parents teach me how to be a racist. In other words, if I’m brought up in a racist household and therefore that could be my view too. Excellent answer.

Child: Wait, are you saying you were?

Brett Kaye: I’m not saying I was, but I’m saying based on what he said, what’s your name?

Child: James

Brett Kaye: Based on what James said, if somebody is brought up in racist household might they themselves become racist?

Child: Um maybe difference?

Brett Kaye: Difference. That’s an excellent answer too. Someone who is different to who I am: I don’t like people who are different, I don’t like their food, I don’t like the way they dress, I don’t like the way that they talk a funny language, they talk in an accent, and all of a sudden that difference can translate into hate. I don’t know about that. I’m ignorant about that. Nobody’s taught me about that. I’ve never learnt about that. Why are they doing all these funny things? Why are singing in this funny way? Why do they talk in this funny way? Why do they dress in this funny way? All that sort of stuff can lead to hatred. Have a look at my answers boys and girls and I think they’re close to yours: someone hurts you or someone you love (we got it), jealousy (Bam! Smacked it on the head), ignorance or lack of education, and what we learn at home.

Firstly, Kaye is not a psychologist. He is a teacher at a Jewish day school in Melbourne, a cantor at a synagogue, and an ADC activist. His opinions about the origins of “hate” are simply that, opinions. He uses leading questions to elicit his preferred responses from the children — a highly manipulative and unethical practice. He is evidently less interested in hearing about “hate” that arises in response to the actions of others because such hatred is eminently rational. Instead, he is keen to emphasize the irrational basis for hatred — with “anti-Semitism” doubtless being, in his mind, the paradigmatic example of such hate. Hostility to Jews is not a rational response to Jewish behavior that compromises the interests of non-Jews, but an irrational, phobic response to “difference.”

Kaye cites innocuous manifestations of difference, such as a “funny language” or unusual “food” or mode of “dress” rather than, say, the demographic displacement of Australian Whites, honor killings, female genital mutilation, demands for sharia law, epidemic rates of violent crime, or the mass rape of White women and children. He might also have mentioned how, as a result of the Jewish-led promotion of “difference” and “multiculturalism,” the Australian children he addresses are the first generation to grow up in a nation where regular Jihadist massacres (and the concomitant danger of being a victim) is now a normative part of their lives. White Australian children are today living in a situation they did not ask for, but which a generation of activists like Kaye (and traitorous politicians) have given them.

Recently concrete bollards, CCTV cameras and warning sirens were installed around Melbourne’s Central Business District in response to the heightened threat of terrorism that has accompanied the reckless importation of a rapidly expanding Muslim population.

The concrete (pun intended) benefits of “diversity” and “multiculturalism” in Australia

The Australian Federal Police recently revealed they have “70-odd investigations” under way into terrorism cases going on around the country. The Premier of Victoria, Daniel Andrews informed his constituents in 2015 that “all of us, as Victorians and indeed Australians, have to accept that violent extremism is part of a contemporary Australia.” Last year his government introduced new laws in panicked response to an explosion in the number of carjackings and home invasions committed by young African and Pacific Islander males. For the first 228 years of the Australian nation’s existence such laws were unnecessary. Australia was a high-trust society founded on certain basic assumptions about human behavior. As a result of mass non-white (and particularly African, Pacific Islander and Middle Eastern) immigration, these assumptions no longer hold.

In the aftermath of recent terrorist attacks throughout the West (including in Australia) a horrifying realization has dawned on growing numbers of White people: their ruling elites regard no price (in murdered and maimed victims, or in the curtailment of civil liberties) as too high to pay for the supposed virtues of increased “diversity” and “multiculturalism.”

EXCERPT 2: “We cannot judge the whole group because of what a few people do”

Brett Kaye: Okay here’s the next word that I googled. Hard to see on this screen for some reason, but what religion do you think I googled when I pulled up that?

Brett Kaye: Muslim/Islam. So I put in Muslim and I put it in Google Images and that’s the first image that came up. Now, if I was a Martian coming from outer space what would I think about Muslim people based on that picture? That Muslim people are?

Child: A bit crazy?

Brett Kaye: Bit Crazy. …

Child: Weird.

Brett Kaye: Weird. Okay now, why do you think somebody put this image up of a Muslim person? What was the purpose? Why would they do that? What do they want me to feel? Whose hand haven’t I seen up for a while? How about you? What’s your name?

Child: Kiera

Brett Kaye: Kiera. Alright tell me, what do you think the person who put that up wanted me to feel about Muslim people?

Child: Maybe a bit scared.

Brett Kaye: Good. That’s exactly what they wanted me to feel. They wanted me to feel scared. In fact the word that we use to describe who do and say bad things about Muslim people is called Islamophobia. I’ll write it out because the screen is unclear. Cos Kiara said that she wanted they wanted me to feel scared. Phobia. Islamophobia is when I am scared of Muslim people because I don’t understand them, and therefore I say and do bad things against them. Now I taught at a beautiful school called ******** Primary School which was a Year 5 and 6 composite class and was sitting in a circle and a little girl put up her hand, her name was Fatima, and she told her own story. She said she was walking home from school with her little brother who was in Prep and all of a sudden some guy came up and swore at her, called her a Muslim and ‘c’ word, pushed her little brother over, and ran away, like a coward. So she was obviously devastated. Devastated. Crying. Her brother was on the floor crying, his books were everywhere and she said what made it even sadder was that people didn’t know what to do. They didn’t know how to react. Lots of people just pretended that never saw the man cross the street, they didn’t want to get involved. Bystanders. Some people came up and helped. But she said that most people just ignored or pretended they never saw. That was the one reason she was upset. The other reason she was upset was, from that moment onwards her parents wouldn’t allow her to go out by herself and her brother. Because they were scared, and you know it’s interesting, a lot of the Muslim schools where I teach at, they say that after a terrorist attack they get so scared because they’re worried that everybody thinks that all Muslim people are bad because of the acts of just a few. And unfortunately, those people who don’t understand or listen to stories, or maybe just read the newspapers, might believe that. You’ve got to make sure that you understand that you cannot judge a whole group of people because of the actions of a few. Ninety-nine percent of Muslim people, just like ninety-nine percent of Jewish people, or Hindu people, or Buddhist people are good. And we cannot judge the whole group because of what a few people do. That’s just being unfair. Yeah?

Child: Yeah but, at the same time, what a few people have done is bad…

Brett Kaye: It’s true. It’s true. That’s why we need to have discussions, we need to have these discussions. Because there are Muslim people who do the wrong thing. But that doesn’t mean that most Muslim people are bad. Because just a few people do the wrong thing. You’re right. And that’s why there is the perception, that why people do things bad, that’s we have to clear that up. It’s not fair. It’s not fair to all the Muslim people who are good people. It’s not fair. Horrible to live your life like that. Feeling that people don’t like you because of your religion. Or because of what a bunch of crazy people do overseas because they’re crazy. Yeah? That doesn’t represent Muslim people all over the world. It represents a bunch of crazy people who are out there doing crazy things. Who really don’t even know what it means to be a Muslim.

Child: Ah, but why do they believe in God? They think that because they think that…

Brett Kaye: They believe in a very warped idea of what it means to be a Muslim. That’s not the way that true Muslims behave. Most Muslim people that you will speak to totally disagree with the way in which these people live their lives. I don’t want to get into a big discussion about it now. All I want to say is, all I want to say, and it’s good that we’re talking about this, all I want to say, is that you cannot judge the actions of a few people and assume that everybody else is like that. Because it’s not true. It’s the same with everything, all types of people. How many other types of phobias guys? We’ve got Islamophobia. What other types of hatreds against groups of people are there?

Anyone who understands Muslims and their religion won’t fear them? Fear of Muslims has nothing to do with Islamic teachings and the actions of Muslims based on those teachings? “Islamophobia” is the result of a lack of understanding? Fundamentalist Muslims have a very warped idea of what it means to be a Muslim, and that’s not the way that true Muslims behave? These are dangerous lies peddled in furtherance of an ethnic agenda that is concealed from the children. Kaye is encouraging White Australian children to feel guilty about opposing a hostile outgroup that aims to establish Sharia law and all that means for women, democratic institutions, and civil liberties.

Exactly mirroring Kaye’s arguments, Melbourne’s Cultural-Marxist newspaper, The Age, in response to yet another deadly terrorist attack, this time by a Somali refugee, recently claimed that it was “dangerously false to see terrorism as an issue about Islam per se. It is about a miniscule minority of psychotic and psychopathic extremists and disenchanted, malleable young people.” It condemned those who “rail against immigration as a cause of terrorism, disquiet and cultural tension in Australia,” for engaging in “irresponsible scaremongering.”

The reality is that Jihadist violence and terrorism don’t originate from “a bunch of crazy people” who “don’t even know what it means to be Muslim.” It doesn’t even originate from the interpretation, let alone the extremist interpretation of the Islamic texts, but from an accurate reading by all practicing Muslims. It’s clear from reading the life of Mohammed and the Koran that killing infidels is justified because it is commanded by Allah against all those who don’t submit to Islam. The clearly-stated long-term goal is the establishment of a global caliphate. Any atrocity committed in pursuit of this aim is justifiable and only makes a martyr of the perpetrator. Those who, like Kaye, disingenuously claim that terrorists are simply “crazy people” doing “crazy things” fail to explain why this particular variety of insanity is almost exclusively confined to adherents of one religion.

For Kaye, the real shame of the (now regular) Islamic terrorist attacks in the West is, not so much the murdered victims and their families, whose lives have been destroyed, but the Muslims who live in fear of a backlash following these attacks. In response to terrorist atrocities, it is, he contends, only ignorant “Islamophobes” who “don’t understand or listen to stories, or maybe just read the newspapers” who think it’s reasonable “to judge a whole group by the actions of a few.”

Kaye conveniently ignores findings like those from a 2016 surveyin the UK that found that 100,000 British Muslims sympathize with suicide bombers and people who commit terrorist attacks. It also found that two-thirds of British Muslims (66%) would not contact the police if they believed somebody close to them was involved with jihadists. A third of British Muslims think that polygamy should be legalized in Britain, and the same percentage refuse to condemn the stoning of women for adultery. The survey found that half of British Muslims believe homosexuality should be a criminal offence — which should ostensibly alarm the representative of an organization supposedly committed to opposing “homophobia.” A 2016 surveyof French Muslims found that 28 per cent hold extremist views and reject secular French law. The evidence clearly shows that Kaye’s assertion that “ninety-nine percent of Muslims are good [i.e. non-threatening]” is a dangerous lie.

“Ninety-nine per cent of Muslims are good” — Brett Kaye

A direct result of the Jewish-led push for greater racial and religious diversity in Australia is that juvenile justice facilities have now reached the point where a specialist facility is needed to manage Islamic extremist inmates. The general secretary of the Public Service Association recently observedthat “Radicalisation is not restricted to adults in the NSW prison system. My members at the juvenile justice system at Cobham have to deal with radicalized young people who openly speak about waiting for an opportunity to behead someone.” Given this reality, it’s not surprising that a survey in April foundthat four out of five Victorians distrust Muslims.

Organized Jewry in Australia is more than Happy to Generalize About Others

Kaye’s proposition that we cannot make negative generalizations about Muslims because it’s “not fair” is belied by the words and actions of the ADC itself. Despite supporting mass non-White immigration and multiculturalism for Australia, this organization, contrary to the rhetoric it espouses for non-Jews, knows that Muslims are a potential deadly threat that need constant and careful monitoring. The former ADC executive director, Deborah Stone, in discussing the organization’s “Anti-Semitism Prevention Project” explained how:

Australia’s Muslim population is growing and is more than triple that of the Jewish community. Most Australian Muslims are committed to multiculturalism but there is evidence of pockets of isolationism and sympathy towards extremist ideologies. The growth of the extremist Hizb-ut-Tahrir is an example. We need to monitor the Australian Muslim community to ensure we understand its plurality of positions, build bridges with moderates and counter fundamentalism in its earliest stages before it becomes a physical threat to our community.

So, while instructing innocent Australian schoolchildren to “be fair” to Muslims because ninety-nine per cent of them are “good,” the ADC is busy monitoring the entire Australian Muslim community to prevent it from becoming “a physical threat to our community.” Despite a survey last year showing half of all Australians oppose any Islamic immigration, the ADC (which happily endorses this policy for Israel), is active in schools encouraging the next generation to swallow this poison.

White Australian schoolchildren are instructed by Jewish activists like Kaye to refrain from engaging in pattern-recognition and drawing of logical inferences because it “isn’t fair.” Don’t conclude that Africans are far more likely to be violent offenders despite statistics showing they are 44 times more likely to break the law and 70 times more likely to commit a home invasion than Australians. The Australian recently reported the comments of Victorian Police Deputy Commissioner, Stephen Leane, who told a state inquiry into youth justice centers that African and Pacific Islander teenagers were “part of the angriest cohort of offenders police had seen, who started out with some of the most violent crimes rather than progressing from misdemeanours.” In response to an epidemic of violent crime committed by African refugees, columnist Andrew Bolt noted Australia’s refugee policy was “a crime against Australians,” observing that “the level and severity of crime by African refugees and their children is astonishing and an indictment of our refugee policies.”

To conclude on the basis of the evidence that Middle Eastern and African migrants and refugees are undesirable is, according to the ADC, “unfair” and morally reprehensible. Australia’s first dedicated refugee policy arose in late 1970’s in direct response to lobbying by the Jewish activist and pioneering multiculturalist Walter Lippmann (see my The War on White Australia: A Case Study in the Culture of Critique, Part 3 of 5”).

In the decades since, organized Jewry has remained at the forefront of those pushing for increased refugee numbers. Bolt notes how it was this policy that

opened our gates to Muslim Lebanese families fleeing the Lebanese civil war — families who formed the nucleus of a community that’s provided more than half the Muslim terrorists jailed here. We also stepped up a refugee program that gave us the men who perpetrated the last three [now four] Islamist terrorist attacks here. … This refugee program also imported the Sudanese community that Victorian police statistics show is now 128 times more likely per person to commit aggravated robberies than other Victorians. To make this disaster worse, we trashed our own history and symbols while running multicultural policies that paid the least assimilated immigrants to stay that way.

A by-product of the mass-importation of low-IQ migrants and refugees is declining educational standards in Australia. The OECD expressed alarm at the nation’s educational slide. The Sydney Morning Herald observedthat “Where once Australia kept up with South Korea, now our east Asian neighbors are streaking ahead on tests that compare the academic ability of 15-year-olds around the world. Students from Poland and Vietnam are now outperforming Australia’s teenagers. … The warning signs have been there for over a decade. Australia’s PISA results have been on the slide since 2003.” Academics have scrambled for reasons (other than the obvious fact of the changing racial make-up of the student body) to account for this sudden decline. Some ascribethe decline to inadequate resourcing of schools — despite the fact that government funding of education in Australia is at an all-time high. A Victoria University report foundthe increasing number of students who drop out of education “are costing taxpayers a staggering $18.8 billion by increasing crime, clogging health services, relying on welfare and reducing tax revenue.”

Of course, unlike working class Whites, Jews in Australia are totally exempt from dealing with the pernicious daily consequences of the decades-long social engineering of their community leaders. Australia’s wealthiest ethnic group can avoid having their children’s education sabotaged by low-IQ, disruptive Africans and Muslims by utilizing their extensive network of lavishly resourced (and ethnically homogeneous) Jewish day-schools. Jewish columnist Kerri Sackville recently notedhow she was “thrilled” with the education her children receive at a Jewish school, where “they learn the meaning of each Jewish festival, they learn to sight read Hebrew, and they learn the history of the Holocaust and the Jewish people.” For her, Jewish schools are of vital importance in helping Jews to “maintain their sense of community, their understanding of their religion, and their cultural heritage.” White Australian children today have no corresponding right.

Kerri Sackville: “thrilled” by her children’s Jewish education

Despite their injunctions to the children to be non-judgmental about particular racial and religious groups, Jewish activists like Kaye routinely generalize about non-Jewish outgroups. Despite the fact that White Australians had absolutely nothing to do with “the Holocaust” (indeed thousands of Australians died fighting Germany in World War II) this is constantly invoked as sufficient justification for the transformation of Australian society through non-White immigration and multiculturalism. Kaye asserts that it’s “unfair to judge an entire people by the actions of a few,” and yet the central notion underpinning organized Jewry’s activism in Australia (and throughout the West) is the generalization that all White people are potential Nazis and, consequently, homogeneously White societies are dangerous for Jews and must be deconstructed.

The one-time editorial committee member of the Australian Jewish Democrat, Miriam Faine, got right to the heart of Jewish support for large-scale non-White immigration and multiculturalism when she noted that: “The strengthening of multicultural or diverse Australia is also our most effective insurance policy against anti-Semitism. The day Australia has a Chinese Australian Governor General I would be more confident of my freedom to live as a Jewish Australian.”[i] Comments like these, which echo those of Barbara Roche in the UK, and Barbara Lerner-Specter in Sweden, make it clear that Jewish promotion of non-White immigration and multiculturalism is, first and foremost, a form or ethnic strategizing (or ethnic warfare) concerned with preventing the development of a mass movement of anti-Semitism in Australia and other Western societies.

In Kaye’s duplicitous injunction to the children to treat everyone as individuals (rather than collectives) we hear echoes of the Frankfurt School’s promotion of radical individualism as the epitome of psychological health for Europeans. The sane and well-adjusted White person was characterized by these Jewish intellectual activists as an individual who had broken free from the traditional Western shaming code, and who realized their human potential without relying on membership in collectivist groups. This promotion of radical individualism among non-Jews was, of course, intended to undermine the group cohesion of Europeans and thereby weaken their capacity to compete with Jews. The defining feature of Jewish history has been that group interests, rather than individual interests, have been of primary importance. Judaism is the prime historical example of how the rejection of individualism (especially in the sociobiological niche of the Diaspora) leads to group evolutionary success (i.e. genetic continuity across millennia).

The uncomprehending veteran political journalist for The Australian, Paul Kelly, recently opined that the "risk for liberals" in "pushing the limits of multiculturalism" is that "in the process they weaken the overall sense of a bonded community with shared values." This outcome is, for the Jews who have spearheaded multiculturalism in Australia, not an unforeseen and lamentable by-product of an otherwise benevolent policy, but its central objective. Radical individualism renders formerly White societies defenseless against collectivist strategies like those pursued by Jews.

[i]Quoted in Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth‑Century Intellectual and Political Movements, (Westport, CT: Praeger, Revised Paperback edition, 2001), 303.


Part 3 of 4

EXCERPT 3: “I was brought up in a racist country”

Brett Kaye: So somebody asked the question of whether I was brought up in a racist household. The answer is no. But I was brought up in a racist country.

Child: What country’s that?

Brett Kaye: I grew up in South Africa, and let me tell you how it is racist. When I was your age …, I grew up in a political system that was called this…

Child: Apartheid? …

 

Brett Kaye: You remember me from last year. So, apartheid, made up of two words in a language called Afrikaans which is kinda like Dutch, means separate-ness. And what apartheid meant, realistically, was because I’m a white fella, life for me was good. A-OK. It meant I would live in the best areas of the city, it meant I could go to the beach (other people couldn’t), it meant people who were white went to white schools, Indians went to Indian schools, blacks went to black schools. Whites lived in black… in white neighborhoods, Indians in Indian neighborhoods, blacks in black neighborhoods. When I was at the park there was a park bench that said [banging the table] “White People Only.” Public transport? There was a bus just for white people, a bus just for Indian people, and a bus just for black people.

Child: Isn’t Indian black?

Brett Kaye: Nup. They were considered to be three separate classifications, Hospitals for white people, hospitals just for Indian people, hospitals just for black people. Black people and White people were not allowed to get married, were not allowed to live in the same house. … What it meant was that white kids and black kids and Indian ones would never ever spend time together because they weren’t allowed to be in the same areas. How do you think a White kid your age, a black kid your age would have felt about white people. Think about it. How do you think black kids who lived two hours out, who lived in houses with no electricity, no running water, no power, made their houses out of whatever materials they could find around? How would that black kid feel about white kids?

Child: Spoilt or jealous?

Brett Kaye: That they were spoilt, that they were jealous, and what does jealousy lead to?

Child: Hate?

Brett Kaye: Hate. There was a lot of hate. What do you think a white kid might have felt about a black kid? Yeah…

Child: Maybe they thought that it was unfair and feel sorry.

Brett Kaye: Maybe. Sorry for them. What do you think maybe if I said to my parents “I want to go hang out two hours away in this neighborhood?” What do you think my parents might have said to me?

Child: No

Brett Kaye: Why?

Child: Because they’re a black person?

Brett Kaye: So they wouldn’t have wanted me to hang out with a black kid because it wasn’t the right thing to do. Hang out with black kids. So there was a lot of racial hatred happening.

Kaye gives the misleading impression that White South Africans simply stole all of the housing, electricity, running water and other infrastructure that existed in South Africa and selfishly hoarded it for themselves, rather than being responsible for the creation of these things which never previously existed in southern Africa. For Kaye, apartheid South Africa was “racist” because “Black and White people were not allowed to get married.” Somehow, the prohibition of marriage between Jews and non-Jews in Israel (which is subject to a two-year prison term), the walls of separation between Palestinians and Israelis on the West Bank, and the different legal treatment forPalestinians and Israelis don’t render that state “racist,” but is an indispensable part of the Jewish people’s right to “self-determination.”

Perhaps White parents would be reluctant to let their children play in Black South African neighborhoods because these are some of the most dangerous places on the face of the Earth, with horrifying levels of violent crime. Of course, the question presents itself as to why Kaye, who grew up in a South Africa supposedly wracked with “racial hatred,” now lives in Australia. He was ostensibly one of the many thousands of Jews who quickly fled the “rainbow nation” after the end of White role (for which the organized Jewish community and a great many individual Jews fought unceasingly), doubtless in response to the tsunami of violent crime and social dysfunction that now grips that failed state. Unlike the many poor Whites who remain, Kaye had the wealth and connections to flee the wreckage for new host.

The vibrant new post-racist South Africa

It’s interesting that Kaye, a zealous proponent of “diversity” and “difference,” in escaping from the disaster zone of post-apartheid South Africa, fled to a Whiter (i.e., less dysfunctional) nation. This has not, however, prevented him from throwing himself into pro-Jewish and anti-White activism in his adopted country. Historian Suzanne Rutland has noted how South African Jews “arrived [in Australia] with a strong sense of Jewish identification and a very low intermarriage rate” and that “many are still coming, largely because of the high level of crime and a sense of insecurity.”[1]

EXCERPT 4: “My reality was different”

Brett Kaye: Let me tell you how my reality was different. So the people who remember me from ******* from last year might remember my religion. Do you remember what my religion is?

Child: Jewish?

Brett Kaye: Jewish. Correct. Now that’s important for this discussion for no other reason than because the school that I went to was a Jewish school and the school made a decision that anybody who wanted to come to the school was allowed to. And those people who could afford to — anybody who could pay extra on top of school fees — that could then fund those kids who wanted to come to the school but couldn’t afford to, like most of them black kids. So I grew up with kids of all different religions and all different races and all different nationalities in my classroom. When I finished school at the end of Year 12 lots of the kids who were in my class were Muslim, Christian, and of course lots of Jews. So I was lucky in that sense. Why do tell that story? Because we learn hatred when we are young. We also learn tolerance when we are young. [inaudible] And all of those different layers make the people that we are, and ultimately the people that we become. So I wanted to tell that story because when I see people still today I see people’s color because that’s the way I was brought up. But I learnt to appreciate people’s differences and to value them and that, I think to me, makes, makes life exciting. Difference, difference makes life exciting. We’ve got to celebrate difference.

Setting aside Kaye’s dubious claim that “lots” of non-Jewish children attended Jewish schools in apartheid South Africa, if children are indeed “lucky” to grow up in a context of racial and religious diversity, why does Israel maintain segregated schools, and why does Kaye not denounce this actually existing (as opposed to South Africa’s now historical) arrangement? If it’s imperative that children learn to appreciate, value and celebrate “difference” because it “makes life exciting,” why does the organization he represents (the ADC) have an unshakable commitment to the preservation of Israel as a “Jewish state”? Why no denunciation of Israel for failing to celebrate difference by blocking all Syrian and other non-Jewish refugees, who would, according to Kaye’s weasel words, only make life in Israel more “exciting”? Instead of condemning “the Jewish state” for implementing its own version of apartheid, and its absolute failure to “celebrate” difference, Kaye is quite content, in his spare time, to lead groups of tourists on “A Musical Journey Through Israel.”

EXCERPT 5: “But you don’t look like a Jew”

Brett Kaye: So as a definition we’ve got here: stereotypes are generalized or ready-made ideas of how persons or members of a group look or act — I know all about those people because I’ve heard about them or read about them, who I might never have met. Yet when I go to some schools, I would say half the schools I go to, and I tell them that I’m Jewish, most of the kids for me for them I’m the first Jewish person that they’ve ever met. So last week, for example, I was in ******** Secondary College and out of about eight groups of kids that I saw everybody but one said I was the first Jewish kid person that they had ever met. And when I tell them that I’m Jewish, the first thing is like, they be like, in shock and then after a while when they’re confident enough to discuss it with me (this was a bunch of Year 9 kids), [coughs] so I said to them ‘Why are you so shocked?’ and eventually, after a while, they go ‘You don’t look like a Jew.’

Brett Kaye actually does look and sound like a Jew

And I said to them ‘Well what does a Jew look like?’ And they were like a bit nervous and embarrassed, and stuff like that, and they said ‘Well you don’t sound like a Jew.’ I said well what does a Jew sound like? And they said ‘Well you don’t speak Jewish.’ I said yeah because there is no such language called Jewish. Um, there are some Jews who speak Hebrew and who live in Israel, but I speak English because I grew up in South Africa, now I live in Australia. Hebrew’s not my language. English is my language. So stereotypes are very interesting. Yes sir?

Child: Like so if you ask someone like, say those kids that didn’t know what a Jew was and you’re like, you’re not a Jew but you ask them what’s a Jew and they know that some people maybe say people who you know have all the curls on their head and…

Brett Kaye: The stereotypical Jewish look yeah with the black hat, the curls and the long black coat like you see maybe in a bookstore or in the movies, whereas most Jews aren’t dressed like that, or live like that. Interesting. Okay. Right. A few words. I’m going to spend a long time because I think it’s too late in the day. The first word is defamation. Right, defamation. The verb for defamation is defame, I defame someone. …

Brett Kaye: And you know sometimes … paparazzis get sued for defamation. Paparazzi are the press that keep taking photos of people because sometimes they might publish something, and even what they publish lowers a person’s reputation… Nowadays, if I want to defame someone what do I do? I could just get into my Instagram and send a quick post, get on my Twitter and do a quick Tweet, get on to my Facebook and send a quick message, and all of a sudden, update my status with thousands of people who, all of a sudden, see what I’ve had to say about someone. Defamation is so easy today. Remember when I said at the beginning of the session we were going to talk about the Internet and its dangers, we’re going to talk about why people hate, and then we’re going to talk about how people who hate get access to the Internet? Well here we go. These are examples. Defamation: lowering someone’s reputation. The next word: incitement. In-cite-ment. What does that mean? I’m gonna tell you an example. I’ve heard that across the road down the street there’s a new family that’s moved in from Syria, they’re refugees, I don’t want them living in my neighborhood. So, after school I’m gonna go when it gets dark, I’m gonna get some spray-paint and write on their walls “go home to where you came from.” I want you guys to come and do that with me. That is incitement. Tell me…

Child: Getting someone to do something bad

Brett Kaye: That’s exactly what it is. Incitement: influencing others to do the wrong thing.

Child: Could that also be peer pressure?

Brett Kaye: Yeah. Absolutely it is. If I influence other people by putting pressure on them to do something wrong, that is incitement. If I post a racist meme, because I don’t like a group of people, and other people see that meme and they start to feel bad about that group of people too, that is incitement. Incitement to hate. Trying to make other people hate people because I do too. And there’s so much of it. You guys have seen it. You guys look on your [inaudible] or your Facebook or whatever it is you’re on and you have seen racist memes and cartoons and trolls writing the most terrible, terrible things. You see it all the time. But we’ve got to click against it. We’ve got to click against the hate. Report it. Yes?

Interestingly, it’s never “hate” or “defamation” when a Jewish-controlled Hollywood is attacking “rednecks,” or “white trash,” or “Euro-trash,” or “dumb blonds” or preachers or Germans. But it suddenly becomes hate and defamation when people make factual pointed criticisms of Jews or other non-Whites. In fact, Hollywood subjects White people to an endless barrage of insults where White women are routinely depicted as stupid, brainless sluts, and White men are depicted as weak, wimpy, foolish and useless. The blonde male as arch villain is a longstanding Hollywood trope. Ruthless, avaricious bankers are always depicted as sociopathic WASPs rather than as the Jews who actually dominate the banking and finance industries. Unappealing Jews or Blacks are cast as leading men and the love interests of attractive White women, regardless of how improbable this is in the real world.

Because Blacks and Whites (except in marginal cases) do not naturally mix this has to be propagandized. So the message from the Jews who run Hollywood to White women is to go mate with Blacks because they are cool, noble, athletic, powerful, and sexually superior. All these memes are continuously put out the Jews of Hollywood to persuade White women to do what they would not do naturally. This psychological warfare through the construction of culture continuously chips away at the margins of White society and over time has an erosive effect — it erodes the stable homogenous, White bulk of the population. It systematically attacks White heterosexual normativity. Through their control of the mainstream media and entertainment industries, the anti-White agenda of a tiny Jewish minority has become the mass culture of the contemporary West. In this culture there are no taboos about attacking, insulting and defaming White people.

Part 4 of 4 July 22, 2017

EXCERPT 6: "Six million Jewish people"

Brett Kaye: Right, who's this guy I googled over here? This one.

Child: Is that supposed to be Osama bin Laden?

Brett Kaye: That’s a Jew. I typed in Jew and that’s what came up first. Now that was taken from, just to let you know, this was taken from a newspaper from Germany in the 1930s called Der Stürmer, that was the name of the newspaper, the voice, and what was happening in Germany in the 1930s? My history buffs in the room. Yes?

Child: Um they were killing Jews?

Brett Kaye: Not yet. They were almost killing Jews. Like who was rising to power? What was their name?

Children: Hitler

Brett Kaye: Between 1933 and 1939 Hitler rose to power …; in 1933 he became the Chancellor, in 1939 World War Two started [claps hands]. So during that time Hitler went on a campaign against Jews, against gypsies, against gay people, against black people, against people who didn’t believe in what Hitler said. And from 1939 to 1945 there was this huge war, as we know, World War Two, and during that time a lot of those people were killed. Six million Jewish people. My family for example. Most of them were killed. My great grandparents, my uncles, my aunts. My grandparents survived, and I’ll tell you something interesting. You talked about bystanders. My grandmother, who lived in Paris, she was saved during the war by a non-Jewish family who didn’t even know her. They hid her in their farm. She lived with the chickens actually. They hid her in the farm and she managed to survive there for three years, from the age of twelve until fifteen, until the war ended, and she came out and she lived. Just because a non-Jewish family chose to save the life of a little Jewish girl they didn’t even know. They weren’t bystanders. Even though they could have got absolutely and utterly in danger, their family and their parents, everybody would have been killed and punished, if they would have been discovered, hiding a Jewish family. Yet they chose to save my grandmother. And because of that here I am and my family’s here. Because of the goodness of somebody who chose to do the right thing.

Children: [Inaudible]

Brett Kaye: I wouldn’t mind having a chat to you after as well matey. Um, hatred and fear of Jews is called anti-Semitism. And I’m lucky in my life, I haven’t experienced any. Nobody’s ever turned around to me and been mean to me because I’m a Jew. But what I can tell you is, the school where I teach at, which is a Jewish school, around the whole school is a big wall with barbed wire and at the entrance to the school are guards with guns.

Child: Guns?

Brett Kaye: At my school yep.

Child: When is this?

Brett Kaye: This is now. The school I teach at. It’s called Mount Scopus College.

Australian patriotism: Mt Scopus College style

Child: How far away?

Brett Kaye: Twenty minutes.

Child: And they have guns?

Brett Kaye: Yeah, the guards have guns. Because last year in Paris two kids were killed at a Jewish school, when people went in and just shot them. In Buenos Aires there were fourteen kids who were killed at a Jewish school because people went in and killed them. It’s stupid. People don’t play nicely together. And because of that we have to have walls around us. When I walk into your school I like it. I just went straight into the café at lunchtime and came straight in here. That’s how it should be. That’s normal. My school is not normal. That’s not how it should be. Shouldn’t have to have guards with guns at schools, that’s ridiculous. I think it’s important for you guys to know that in your city, at a school not very far away from here, there are six Jewish school, there are nine Jewish day-schools in Melbourne, and all of them have guards with guns, you wouldn’t see them obviously, because no one wants to show their gun, but just in case. It’s crazy. Some Muslim schools as well. Because of the threats against Muslim kids. It’s crazy.

“Click Against Hate” sessions build up to this emotional crescendo where “the Holocaust” is invoked as the ultimate, irrefutable moral justification for “diversity,” “multiculturalism” and “tolerance.” The entire social and political order of the contemporary West — based as it is on spurious notions of racial equality and the supposed virtues of racial diversity and multiculturalism — has been erected on the moral foundations of “the Holocaust.” White people cannot be recognized as a group with interests because “never again.” Western nations have a moral obligation to accept unlimited non-White immigration from the Third World because “never again.” Whites should meekly accept their deliberate displacement (and ultimate extinction) because “never again.”

Of course, the massive Jewish involvement in the deaths of many millions under communism could just as easily be cited as the ultimate, irrefutable, moral justification against any Jewish involvement in non-Jewish polities. How many Jews were “bystanders” in in the early twentieth century as millions of Europeans were sent to the gulag or murdered? Alexander Solzhenitsyn made the point trenchantly when he pointed out that “the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.”

In the cause of “never again,” Jewish activists take great pride in having been the principle driving force behind the dismantling of the White Australia policy. However, what if the reverse was the case? What if White Australians had led a successful crusade against the “Israel is a Jewish state” policy, a series of laws that restricted non-Jewish immigration to Israel? What if they expressed great pride in this achievement, and remained in the vanguard of those pushing for ever greater racial and religious diversity and multiculturalism for Israel? What if they devised and ran “educational” programs in Israeli schools promoting ever-increasing racial and religious diversity for Israeli children as a moral imperative? Would this be regarded as anything other than hostile action on the part of an antagonistic group that fully merited the hatred of Jews? Would Jews be “tolerant” of actions that so obviously imperiled their group evolutionary interests? Of course not. Yet White Australian children are sanctimoniously lectured by ardent Zionists like Kaye to show “tolerance” as their right to demographic self-determination is denied, and their futures are stolen.

Thanks to the increased “diversity” triggered by the Jewish-led overthrow of the White Australia policy, and virtual commandeering of Australia’s immigration and refugee polices ever since, the Jewish lawyer and activist Ruth Barson is now confident that: “The chances of the Holocaust occurring in Australia today are remote,” but cautions that history shows Jews are never truly safe, and consequently, “we should have no tolerance for even the shadows of racism and xenophobia. These are dangerous in any guise.”

Jewish activist Ruth Barson

Barson is, however, willing to make an exception for one form of racism: that inherent in Judaism itself. The Jewish historian Norman Cantor observed how “racism is itself a central doctrine in traditional Judaism and Jewish cultural history. The Hebrew Bible is blatantly racist, with all the talk about the seed of Abraham, the chosen people, and Israel as a light to the other nations. Orthodox Jews in their morning prayers still thank God daily that he did not make Jews ‘like the other peoples of the earth.’ If this isn’t racism, what is?”[i]

Dvir Abramovich, the chairman of the ADC, contends that “The horrors of the Holocaust did not begin in the gas chambers — but with hateful words of incitement and contempt, and with the demonizing of anyone who was deemed unworthy by the Nazis.” Accordingly, in addition to supporting the prosecution of “hate speech” through Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, he insists “it’s time that compulsory teaching about the Holocaust is introduced in all Australian schools, to not only develop an understanding of the dangerous ramifications of racism and prejudice, but to heighten awareness of the value of diversity, religious freedom, acceptance and pluralism.” In 2012 the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies succeeded, after intense lobbying, in having study of “the Holocaust” made compulsory for all New South Wales school students.

Interestingly, despite his avowed determination to “fight prejudice, bigotry and hatred whenever and wherever it happens,” Abramovich had nothing to say about the recent move by Israel’s education ministry to ban a book for high schools that portrayed a love story between an Israeli Jew and a Palestinian Muslim. According to the ministry, those identities are best kept “separate,” because  “young people of adolescent age don’t have the systemic view that includes considerations involving maintaining the national-ethnic identity of the people and the significance of miscegenation.” In response to the move, Israeli sociologist Uri Ram made the point that “Israel is not a liberal democracy, but an ‘ethnocracy’” that “bases its dominant Jewish nationalism on an ethnic model of citizenship based on blood, compared with the territorial model of citizenship. Intermarriages are not considered as a private deviation from norms, but rather as a transgression of the boundaries of the national community. They are considered a treason of Zionism.”

While conveniently ignoring this, Abramovich is more than willing to get involved in censoring texts for Australian schoolchildren. Last year he “condemned the inclusion of a play on the [senior school] drama list, Tales of a City by the Sea, which depicted life in Gaza and was written by Palestinian playwright Samah Sabawi.” The Victorian education minister initiated the review “after the B’nai B’rith Anti-Defamation Commission and the Jewish Community Council of Victoria complained that the play promoted an anti-Jewish agenda and could isolate Jewish students.” Abramovich claimed, in truly Orwellian words, that students should not be exposed to “pedagogical materials” that “create tension and disharmony” and that school text selection “must reflect community standards by ensuring that students are provided with plays that promote understanding of complex issues and which furnish its learners with appropriate context and balance.” “Community standards” is Abramovich’s lexical camouflage for “Jewish standards” — which demand that pro-Palestinian and pro-White voices are systematically censored within the arts and education.

Kaye notes how in the new improved, diverse, multicultural Australia, Jewish schools have to be surrounded by barbed wire and guarded by armed security services (paid for with an $18 million grant from Australian taxpayers). Of course, this situation is a direct practical result of the Jewish community’s decades-long “diversity” agenda. It was only in 2016 that Jewish schools suddenly felt the need to adopt these security measures in response to large-scale Islamic immigration and the associated threat of terrorism. News Limited notedhow “There are now more armed guards and CCTV cameras in Australian schools than ever before amid growing security and terror-related concerns. While there are no armed guards in government schools, it’s a different story for a string of Jewish and Islamic schools across Victoria and New South Wales.”

More fruits of Jewish-led “diversity” in Australia

It’s a stunning measure of organized Jewry’s fear and loathing of White Australia that this is regarded as an acceptable price to pay to ensure increased “diversity.” Doubtless it also serves an additional purpose in reinforcing the bunker mentality of Australian Jewry — the maintenance of which is a key part of the attempts by community leaders to prevent intermarriage. Kaye is careful not to associate the need for increased security with the threat posed by a growing Islamic population. He simply states that Jewish schools have been forced to adopt these security measures in response to “anti-Semitism,” while some Islamic schools have taken similar steps in response to “Islamophobia.” The children could reasonably conclude that it is White Australians, whose schools apparently don’t require such protection, that are the main source of this “crazy” violent hatred.

Despite having to fortify their schools against potential jihadist attacks, Australian Jewry see themselves as beneficiaries of policies explicitly designed to dilute the power of the traditional European-derived Australian majority. They have sought to make alliances with various immigrant groups in opposition to the White majority, including Muslims. Attempts to form a political coalition with Muslims dates from the earliest days of Australian multiculturalism. Australian Jews sought Muslim support for the enactment of the racial discrimination legislation recommended by the Walter Lippmann-chaired Committee on Community Relations in the mid-1970s. In the years since, the ADC has repeatedly enlisted the support of Muslims in lobbying for various multicultural policies, including those relating to “access to government services, recourse for victims of discrimination, and protection from harassment.” Jewish activist organizations like the Australia Israel and Jewish Affairs Council were quick to enlist Australia’s Muslim leaders in their successful campaign to oppose any changes to Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act in 2016.

EXCERPT 7: Shut it down

Brett Kaye: Right, somebody asked me earlier ‘how do you report?’ Who asked me that question? You asked me the question? Oh, you asked me the question? Somebody asked me the question. Well let me tell you. If we don’t want to be a bystander, we want to report. Every single social media sight has got a report button. On YouTube you have to be a member, in other words you have to have an account to report on YouTube. You press the three dots, where it says ‘More,’ and then it will tell you how to do a report and then ask you what don’t you like about this clip. Tell me. If they don’t take it down straight away, do it again, and if they still don’t take it down, do it again, get your friends to do it, get your family to do it, get your class, if not get your school to do it as a project about something that you find very offensive. This also applied to all social media sites, it applies to Facebook, where I found this meme about Cathy Freeman so we reported it at my school. It got taken down. Or it might be Instagram, that’s the old Instagram (we haven’t updated it yet), where you press the report. You don’t know whether they take it down or not, you have to keep checking. All right? If you see something bad, boys and girls, someone’s bullying you, someone’s mean to you, you see something yuck, take a screenshot so that, if you need to report it, you can show them exactly what it is that you don’t like. Lot of people unfollow, report the abuse and, of course delete the comment after you have taken a screenshot.

The above is interesting if only for the insight it gives into the psychology and tactics of Jewish activist organizations like the ADC. Report all content contrary to Jewish interests, and if this doesn’t work, simply keep reporting it until you eventually have it shut down. Monash University professor Andrew Markus has noted how, through adopting this aggressive and unrelenting approach to lobbying, “Jews were amongst the leading advocates of the enactment and extension of racial vilification and anti-discrimination legislation by the federal and state parliaments.”[ii]

In the decades since the enactment of the Racial Discrimination Act in 1975, Jewish activists in Australia have pushed for further legal restrictions on speech deemed contrary to their interests. In 1995 their activism, in the form of detailed submissions to the National Inquiry into Racist Violence and the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, succeeded in having the notorious section 18C inserted into the Act. This section radically restricted free speech in Australia by making it “unlawful to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people because of their race, color or national or ethnic origin of the person or of some or all of the people in the group.” In doing so, Section 18C placed totalitarian limits on the freedom of speech in a nation traditionally regarded as one of the freest in the world. Since its enactment, as noted by the Jewish journalist Michael Gawenda, “Jewish community leaders have played a crucial role in organizing the opposition to any potential change to the RDA,” and Jews once again led the opposition to any change to Section 18C during a recent federal Parliamentary Inquiry into Freedom of Speech.

At the end of the “Click Against Hate” session, in order to consolidate the brainwashing that has hopefully occurred, the children are instructed to produce a poster or video promoting virtues of diversity and denouncing the various forms of “hate” that have been discussed in the session (which, strangely enough, doesn’t include Jewish hate of non-Jews). They are told they are "going to be ambassadors for this program" and are encouraged to "share the love" with their family and friends. "Click Against Hate" is yet another manifestation of how an organized, wealthy and intensively-networked Jewish community of just 100,000 has effectively hijacked the demographic destiny and culture of a nation. Through their indefatigable lobbying, propaganda and activism, these master infiltrators are always devising new ways to get inside the heads of White children. It is bad enough that Jews inculcate maladaptive ideas into our children through Hollywood and the general curriculum, without their having directly infiltrated Australian schools.


[i] Norman Cantor, The Sacred Chain – The History of the Jews (New York, NY; HarperCollins, 1994). 336.

[ii] Andrew Markus, "Multiculturalism and the Jews," In: New Under the Sun – Jewish Australians on Religion, Politics & Culture, Ed. Michael Fagenblat, Melanie Landau & Nathan Wolski (Melbourne: Black Inc., 2006), 101.