News Ticker

ADL Changes Definition of Racism so Only Whites Can be Labeled as Racist

By Chris Menahan | 28 January 2022

INFORMATION LIBERATION — The Anti-Defamation League has changed the definition of racism so that it only applies to white people.

The pro-Israel, pro-censorship lobbying group currently defines racism as, “The marginalization and/or oppression of people of color based on a socially constructed racial hierarchy that privileges white people.”

Their previous definition for racism said: “Racism is the belief that a particular race is superior or inferior to another, that a person’s social and moral traits are predetermined by his or her inborn biological characteristics. Racial separatism is the belief, most of the time based on racism, that different races should remain segregated and apart from one another.”

They appear to have changed the definition in July 2020.

Their older definition presents problems considering their own supremacist and separatist policy positions[…]

9 Comments on ADL Changes Definition of Racism so Only Whites Can be Labeled as Racist

  1. Leave it to the yids to move the goalpost. The skill of mendacity belongs to the yids. The bifurcated portion of the human genetic pool. Characteristics include the lack of conscience, the lack of empathy, and the lack of a human soul.
    Willis Carto identified and explained this dichotomy, many times during his tenure as Editor of “The Barnes Review”. VOLUME XVI, no 3. Find it, read it and edify.

  2. The desperation to divide is pathetically palpable , their tactics have become laughable in its forced nature, grasping at straws people know better now how to deal with these trolls

    • I am waiting for evidence of people realizing this, I see little. Israel is actually asking the US for more billions and the US tax payer pays for Israelis medical bills and college tuition, something we do not receive ourselves. Outrageous.

  3. The ADL advertise themselves as an anti-hate organization…LOL!! With this definition change they confirm all the rumours, they are in fact the greatest purveyors of hate on the planet. It’s as if they advertised in a giant neon sign – “it’s true, we are involved in the genocide of the white race. We are not hiding it anymore.”

  4. Since some on here get into the ‘Meme culture,’ seems relevant to break something down. Was listening to your show yesterday, Russ, and Giuseppe made a simple but valuable observation about usury. He just used a parallel in the sports world, in Football, in the use of ‘The Sweep’ over and over until it was dismantled. I think this ‘Football Play’ or ‘Sports Play’ analogy could have some value in explaining how these idiots do things, because they repeat the same strategies over and over and over again. They wouldn’t work at all, if people had a simple format that made it easy to understand what they are doing. Instead, it seems complex, which makes people ‘sort of understand’ in the interim and then have a kind of social-amnesia in the long-term, allowing the same ‘play’ to be run on them again.

    Mentioned this here, because this use of ‘Skin-Tone-Abstraction’ is a strategy/play utilized most- by far- by the so-called ‘Secular’ Jewish diaspora, and their ‘Black-Jewish Alliance,’ which also connects to the larger Muslim/Arab/African world in interesting ways, both which are weaponized for proxy-war purposes. They’ve extended the definitions of these terms into Latin American and Native Americans/Indians as well, which are not at all what they are labeling them. It’s pure weaponization. For instance, Indians/Natives are Asiatic/Asian in genetic heritage, moved onto the North American continent thousands of years ago, then some in later years would interbreed with Europeans. So they are mostly Asiatic-Natives with some ‘white’ or European. Latin-Americans, as their name suggests, were Natives in the same regard, and intermarried with the Spanish. They speak a European language, two of them, for Christ’s sake (English, Spanish), yet these Jewish NGOs are suggesting they are some kind of Alien ‘brown people’ torn from their Aztec roots- which of course, are the ‘roots’ being stirred up in the ‘Azteca’ article you wrote recently, or with various other cults down there, in the same vein that these groups use other Romantic, ‘Noble-Savage’ myths to create proxy-armies. Hitler himself had an obsession with Native Americans in this regard, more so than even Germans. The point is, the terms are purely categories of the mind, being weaponized for geopolitical strategy, meant to unify one group, make them larger and larger under a banner of ‘skin-tone,’ while shrinking the other group, under that very same banner, and then allowing a speculative group on top to play both sides. Not all that complicated- just needs to be spread like wildfire so people understand wtf they are doing.

    Here’s easy breakdown. Look at any government form nowadays, where they ask ‘race,’ and you will see ‘African American,’ ‘Native American/First Peoples,’ ‘Asian American,’ ‘Latin American/Hispanic’- and then next to those . . . ‘White.’ Notice anything different? Every one of those groups has a country/nation of origin, and is also called an American. ‘White’ is neither called American, nor given their Nation/Continent of origin, which is obvious- Europe. When someone, or a group, has been extracted in this way, they have actually been de-racinated, as E. Michael Jones has pointed out with ‘Slaughter of Cities.’ ‘White’ means nothing. It is possibly a melanin level, if that. But I’ve even seen Eastern Europeans, Mediterranean Peoples, who are darker, calling themselves ‘Non-white’ and ‘People of Color’ for the social advantage. Well, that’s a problem, because genetically they are European. There is nothing ‘Of Color’ about them, besides tanning oil or long walks on the beach. But that language, dealing with only visual ‘color’ language, is outdated, like phrenology. Race has not been defined by Skin-tone or color in over a hundred years, more- just read the book ‘Saxons, Vikings, Celts’ for instance, and you get a quick, but realistic view of what ‘race’ is. ‘White’ and ‘Black’ and ‘Brown’ are not ‘races.’ They are weaponized political categories being used in a geopolitical strategy that shrinks the size of European ethnic peoples- all while Ashkenazics play both sides, playing confused if ‘Jews are white or not,’ playing the ‘fellow white’ card. You don’t see a lot of ‘Blacks’ complaining when ‘Black Jews’ talk about being ‘Black,’ do you? Hmm- wonder why that is?

    So here it is in quick breakdown. And take note, because this is ALMOST ALWAYS met with opposition, these dumbass accounts will swarm in, INSISTING that people stay within these boundaries- which is suspect as a motherfucker. Whoever those accounts are, they should be investigated if they are from IPs, people who’ve done this over a continual span, which many of them have- often from outside the US, and from people who aren’t even European/White.

    It’s all logical, all based around being ‘Non-white.’ Why? Because, simply put, MOST OF THE GLOBE IS NON-WHITE. The category Non-White is literally ‘every other race but one, white/european.’ So it is trying to unite peoples under one singe banner against Europeans by Identifying them as NON-European. Black, ‘Brown’ (whatever the fuck that is), Asian, Native/Indian- all Non-White. Want to stress that ‘Non-White,’ again, is a category of the mind. There is no ‘Non-White.’ Jews and whoever made it up to unite totally separate groups of people, with different origins, to make them all seem like they have something in common by being ‘Not White.’ Know who is also mostly ‘not white’? People south of the Equator. Many who have European blood. Doesn’t matter with these retarded categories though. And Soros-Network uses that, with the term ‘Global South,’ which is weaponized against the Global North, which is naturally, because it is above the equator, going to have lighter skin. All about the visual of skin, which again, has not been a sufficient definition of race for over a hundred years- it’s like bringing back phrenology. Also, if you ever notice, Black and Brown are interchangeable. There is no fixed definition of ‘Brown.’ It was a new word that came out of the Open Society Network to Unite African Americans, the broader Muslim Cultures, Latin Americans (whom they label ‘brown,’ even though they are European and speak two European languages), Asians, also, will call themselves ‘Brown’ sometimes, and also consider themselves, when it suits, ‘People of Color,’ so that makes them ‘Non-White,’ even though a large portion of ‘Caucasian’ peoples, especially in Eastern Europe, Poland, Russia, are very much Asiatic and European, with that line having been blurred quite a bit over the millennia, with ‘promiscuous’ figures like Genghis Khan. See how this strategy works?

    Now. I’ll end it with a riddle, which relates to the article. What group of people is White, Non-White, Black, Brown, or Asian, All or Non of those, they are European, African, Arab, Asian, get racial/ethnic protection rackets all to their own category and for either/all of those (or none, if they want), they are a religion, but have an atheistic-weaponized-apostasy, whom they say is still part of their religion, even though they aren’t religious, which they have the largest protection racket in the world for, AND they are considered both a Nation, and not a Nation, whichever they choose?

    See who has a Game-Theoretic advantage here, out of pure abuse of logic, rule of law, and basic semantic reliability (words mean what they mean, people mean what they say etc) needed for people to have conversations with each other? And it’s not because they are brilliant. It’s all a bunch of logical fallacy, easily dismantled in a few paragraphs. Took all of five minutes to write this. If I can do that, surely Generals, the ‘learned, logically rigorous’ Justice System can recognize it, for Christ’s sake.




    4.) (Wait- I thought the ADL taught the technique that killed George Floyd- awfully quick on the signage-promotion, aren’t they?)


    Foreword — Daat Emet

    For a long time we have been considering the necessity of informing our readers about Halacha’s real attitude towards non-Jews. Many untrue things are publicized on this issue and the facts should be made clear. But recently, we were presented with a diligently written article on the subject, authored by a scholar from the Merkaz HaRav yeshiva — so our job was done by others (though we have already discussed some aspects of this issue in the weekly portions of Balak and Matot; see there). Since there is almost no disagreement between us and the author of the article on this issue, we have chosen to bring the article “Jews Are Called ‘Men'” by R’ David Bar-Chayim (in Hebrew) so that the reader will be able to study and understand the attitude of the Halacha towards non-Jews.

    In this article R’ Bar-Chayim discusses the attitude towards “Gentiles” in the Torah and in the Halacha and comes to an unambiguous conclusion:

    “The Torah of Israel makes a clear distinction between a Jew, who is defined as ‘man,’ and a Gentile.”

    That is to say, any notion of equality between human beings is irrelevant to the Halacha. R’ Bar-Chayim’s work is comprehensive, written with intellectual honesty, and deals with almost all the aspects of Halachic treatment of non-Jews. It also refutes the statements of those rabbis who speak out of wishful thinking and, influenced by concepts of modern society, claim that Judaism does not discriminate against people on religious grounds. R’ Bar-Chayim shows that all these people base their constructs not on the Torah but solely on the inclinations of their own hearts. He also shows that there are even rabbis who intentionally distort the Halachic attitude to Gentiles, misleading both themselves and the general public.

    For the English readers’ convenience we will briefly mention the topics dealt with in R’ Bar-Chayim’s article:

    Laws in regard to murder, which clearly state that there is Halachic difference between murder of a Jew and of a Gentile (the latter is considered a far less severe crime).

    A ban on desecrating the Sabbath to save the life of a Gentile.

    A Jew’s exemption from liability if his property (e. g. ox) causes damage to a Gentile’s property. But if a Gentile’s property causes damage to a Jew’s property, the Gentile is liable.

    The question of whether robbery of a Gentile is forbidden by the Torah’s law or only by a Rabbinic decree.

    A ban on returning a lost item to a Gentile if the reason for returning it is one’s sympathy towards the Gentile and compassion for him.

    The sum which a Gentile overpays in a business transaction due to his own error is forfeit; whether a Jew is permitted to intentionally deceive a Gentile is also discussed.

    One who kidnaps a Jew is liable to death, but one who kidnaps a Gentile is exempt.

    A Jew who hurts or injures a Gentile is not liable for compensation of damage, but a Gentile who hurts a Jew is liable to death.

    One who overcharges a Gentile ought not return him the sum that the Gentile overpaid.

    A Gentile — or even a convert to Judaism — may not be appointed king or public official of any sort (e. g. a cabinet minister).

    One who defames a female proselyte (claiming that she was not virgin at the time of her marriage) is liable to neither lashes nor fine.

    The prohibition to hate applies only to Jews; one may hate a Gentile.
    One may take revenge against or bear a grudge towards Gentiles; likewise, the commandment “love your neighbor” applies only to Jews, not to Gentiles.
    One who sees Gentile graveyards should curse: “Your mother shall be greatly ashamed…”

    Gentiles are likened to animals.

    If an ox damaged a Gentile maidservant, it should be considered as though the ox damaged a she-ass.
    The dead body of a Gentile does not bear ritual impurity, nor does a Gentile who touches the dead body of a Jew become impure — he is considered like an animal who touched a dead body.
    One is forbidden to pour anointing oil on a Jew, but there is no ban on pouring that oil on a Gentile because Gentiles are likened to animals.
    An animal slaughtered by a Gentile is forbidden, even if the ritual slaughter performed was technically correct, because Gentiles are deemed like animals. (Daat Emet does not agree that this is the Halachic reason for invalidating a Gentile’s ritual slaughter — but this is not the place to delve into the subject).
    Their members(genitals) are like those of asses” — Gentiles are likened to animals.
    Between the Jews and the Gentiles — In the Aggadah, the Kabbalah, and in Jewish Thought

    R’ Bar-Chayim’s arguments and conclusions are clear, Halachically accurate, and supported by almost all the existent major Halachic works. It would be superfluous to say that R’ Bar-Chayim fully embraces this racist Halachic outlook as the word of the Living G-d, as he himself pointed out in the “Conclusion” of his article: “It is clear to every Jew who accepts the Torah as G-d’s word from Sinai, obligatory and valid for all generations, that it is impossible to introduce ‘compromises’ or ‘renovations’ into it.”

    On the other hand, we want to make it clear that Daat Emet — as well as any reasonable people who do not embrace Halachic laws as the word of the Living G-d — are repulsed by such evil, racist discrimination.

    In the Hebrew text we have abridged the second part of R’ Bar-Chayim’s article, “Between Jews and Gentiles — In the Aggadah, the Kabbalah, and in Jewish Thought,” because, in our view, the Halacha is the law which obligates every religious Jew while concepts of the Aggadah, the Kabbalah, and Jewish thought are not binding on anyone, as our rabbis have already written: “And so the Aggadic constructs of the disciples of disciples, such as Rav Tanchuma and Rabbi Oshaya and their like — most are incorrect, and therefore we do not rely on the words of Aggadah” (Sefer HaEshkol, Laws of a Torah Scroll, p. 60a); we have expanded on this issue in the portion of Vayeshev.

    Tzfi’a 3
    Rabbi David Bar Chaim
    Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav

    • Do the race of vipers include albino people as oppressors of nonwhites in their ‘nonwhites only’ hypocritical fantasy world? Also ADL’s ‘new definition’ of racism implies that their own kind is dumped in with the world’s ‘people of color’.

Post a Comment

Winter Watch
%d bloggers like this: