Against Fjordman

Although I had promised never to comment at Mangan’s again, I could not resist responding to the last instance of psychological dissociation by Fjordman in this thread. Dennis Mangan seems to have deleted my comment, perhaps because what I had written about him here (something unrelated to Fjordman). The other possibility is that my comment turned invisible due to a Blogger bug.

Anyway: although my removed comment replicates what I had stated here in the first entry of this incarnation of my blogsite, the subject of Jew-blind counter-jihad is worth revisiting.

At Mangan’s Fjordman wrote yesterday:

“The obsession with Jews you encounter in some of the comments here does turn sensible people off. It’s stupid, and looks that way, too” (my italics).

Isn’t this like saying: “The obsession with Muslims you encounter in some of the comments at Jihad Watch, Brussels Journal and Ned May’s Gates of Vienna does turn sensible people off. It’s stupid, and looks that way, too”?

The counter-jihad movement in general and Fjordman in particular are in denial: they deny that there’s a Jewish Problem just as liberals deny that there’s a Muslim Problem.

Since counter-jihadists are notoriously philo-Semitic, they have had the nasty little habit of shunning true nationalists when the latter confront the counter-jihadists with their dissociation about the Jewish Question. No frank discussion about the influence of Jews in our civilization is possible within the main sites that alert the western world against the concerted effort by Islamic jihadists.

If counter-jihadists fancy themselves as defenders of western civilization why do they often resort to shunning genuine nationalists, Fjordman included? The straightforward answer is that, when the best minds in the counter-jihad movement dare to enter the arena, the nationalists thoroughly deconstruct their philo-Semitic views (cf. what happened to poor Larry Auster and poor Takuan Seiyo).

That’s what they fear.

Take a quick look at my latest exchange on the Jewish Question at Jihad Watch (search “Chechar” here). Look how, after their many insults and ad hominems, they became silent when confronted with their ignorance about Holodomor crimes in the former Soviet Union, perpetrated by Jews in the century when we were born. This is the kind of stuff that the likes of Fjordman will never address because it’s so obvious that what the Jews have done to native whites is far worse than all the Muslim terrorists acts against the West put together.

Counter-jihadists like Fjordman are just willfully ignorant about the Jewish Problem. How many of them know that Ashkenazi Jews performed eugenic, Mengele-like experiments on Sephardic children in Israel (1st of 5 YouTube documentary here)?

7 Replies on “Against Fjordman

  1. At Mangan’s, Captainchaos has responded to Fjordman:

    “The obsession with Jews you encounter in some of the comments here does turn sensible people off. It’s stupid, and looks that way, too.”

    That is a matter of opinion, Fjordman. Most probably, those you diagnose as suffering a “stupid” “obsession” with Jews assign no greater blame to Jews for the decline of the White race than Kevin MacDonald does. In fact, they most likely rely in whole or in part on MacDonald’s own scholarship. So then, in effect, you are asserting the failure of MacDonald to support his thesis. Would you be willing to debate the matter purely on the strength or weakness of the evidence MacDonald marshals? If not, you should cease to impute pathology to good men who wish their people to live and not die – we all know who else does that.

  2. If counter-jihadists fancy themselves as defenders of western civilization why do they often resort to shunning genuine nationalists

    It’s because counter-jihadists tend first and foremost to be pro-jew and pro-Israel. They are pro-West only to the extent they believe Whites provide living conditions in which jews thrive.

    How can they respond to this point other than to shun or silence their critics? When and where they argue it’s invariably to change the subject to jew-hate, which only reveals their dissembling and dissimulation for what it is.

  3. I would distinguish between malicious blindness and scepticism or lack of interest on the topic. In this case I think that it should not be denounced but accepted.

    I can say this because I have been a sincere judeophile myself.

    1. In the case of Fjordman and the counter-jihadists at the Gates of Vienna and the Jihad Watch comments section who have been confronted by the dissident voices of the current narrative, it is clearly a voluntary surrender to Evil. How do I know? Because Fjordman et al have had every chance to educate themselves and have chosen to dissociate the whole problem in their minds (see e.g., my latest exchange with them). Their sin of dishonesty comes from their intellectual cowardice (cf. also my first comment in this thread).

  4. when the best minds in the counter-jihad movement dare to enter the arena, the nationalists thoroughly deconstruct their philo-Semitic views (cf. what happened to poor Larry Auster and poor Takuan Seiyo).

    I have witnessed this enough times now to know it is absolutely true.

    Very entertaining/educational to witness, I must add.

  5. I think you should be aware Chechar, that Fjordman has now told an open lie about you on that 2nd thread, but it concerns the first. He has launched into an unbelievable attack against you on the second thread now , and in that attack he states:

    I was genuinely annoyed by the fact that certain people hijacked a post that took me many hours to write, and quite frankly years to think about, thereby destroying what could otherwise have been an interesting and fruitful discussion of a highly important subject. If I regret anything it’s not deleting Chechar when he started hijacking the thread after just five comments. It’s not the only time he has displayed this characteristic bully behavior and he should be called on it immediately. A person has every right to ask a bully to leave his private home and should offer no apologies for doing so. It’s quite rude to derail other people’s work when you know quite well that your presence is not wanted, and although he has his flaws, Chechar is not so stupid that he doesn’t know that. He even admits himself that he was rude.

    “The simple fact is that when it comes to giving birth to the Proposition Nation, which was the subject of my original essay, Jews were quite irrelevant. This means that people like Chechar hijacked the thread and destroyed what could have been a promising discussion by spamming it with largely irrelevant issues. I have every right to be angry about that, give him the middle finger and ask him to leave. He has no right to whine and complain for this, none whatsoever. He is a bully who intrudes where he knows he is unwanted, yet pretends to be a victim and wallows in self-pity when the owner asks him to leave. This is Muslim-like behavior.

    Although there is much you could dive into him for (you behave like a Muslim?? LOL—You “Hijacked and Derailed” the thread??? Is he mad??)

    I am focusing on his open and shameless lie of stating that “he even admits himself he was rude”. As you know, this was not the context of your statement at all, as this was you actually wrote:

    I plead guilty to the rudeness charge, Fjordman: but my rudeness against you was limited to my blog and once at Tan’s, where you have never commented on in any of our threads. But I have never insulted you here at GoV (as you now are insulting me).

    I think you must take a bow Chechar! To have such a supposed “great mind” of the counter-jihad movement driven to the point of fabricating evidence in a sad attempt to convict you, well, I am afraid we can see who really is the more superior person here–and it sure as hell ain’t ‘Fjordman’.

    I cannot believe how far he has fallen.

    M.