…by Jonas E. Alexis, VT Editor

The late columnist Joseph Sobran was an American patriot because he had the moral and intellectual courage to take the Zionist ideology bull by the horns and yang the gangsters off their political pedestal.

Sobran, unlike political prostitutes like Ann Coulter and Dinesh D’Souza who have an incestuous obsession with calling out “The Left” for the bad things that “The Right” are doing, knew that he had to fight. And fighting in the culture wars means that you have to specifically and methodically name the people who are actually dragging America and much of the West into a political sinkhole. Sobran once wrote:

“Talking about American politics without mentioning the Jews is a little like talking about the NBA without mentioning the Chicago Bulls. Not that the Jews are all-powerful enough; and their power is unique in being off-limits to normal criticism even when it’s highly visible. They themselves behave as if their success were a guilty secret, and they panic, and resort to accusations, as soon as the subject is raised.

“Jewish control of the major media in the media age makes the enforced silence both paradoxical and paralyzing. Survival in public life requires that you know all about it, but never refer to it. A hypocritical etiquette forces us to pretend that the Jews are powerless victims; and if you don’t respect their victimhood, they’ll destroy you.”

This is not an anti-Semitic assertion. We know by now that Jewish scholars are saying the same thing. Sobran again wrote: “An ‘anti-semite’ in actual usage, is less often a man who hates Jews than a man certain Jews hate. The word expresses the emotional explosion that occurs in people who simply can’t bear critical discourse about a sacred topic, and who experience criticism as profanation and blasphemy.”[1]

Sobran, a commentator on the CBS Radio and a syndicated columnist with the Los Angeles Times, was himself labeled an anti-Semite by Neocon Norman Podhoretz. And he was eventually fired from the National Review, which has been a Neoconservative flagship since the beginning of time.[2] In fact, National Review, as Murray Rothbard himself argued, was a CIA front.

“James Burnham, one of the founders of National Review, worked for the [Congress for Cultural Freedom, which was established by the CIA]. He was also a former Trotskyite and a CIA agent. Also associated with the CCF was the father of neoconservatism, Irving Kristol.”[3]

National Review, as E. Michael Jones points out, “was created to destroy isolationist conservatism. People who criticized America’s march to the empire from the conservative point of view were to be demonized and decertified. NR has shown undeviating consistency in this regard, the most recent example being David Frum’s diatribe against the paleoconservatives…”[4]

It was no surprise that the usual suspects sent their pawn, William F. Buckley, to attack Sobran and to say weird things. By 1955, Buckley was already a CIA agent.

“Rothbard says that Buckley was directed to the CIA by Yale Professor Wilmoore Kendall, who introduced him to James Burnham, a consultant to the Office of Policy Coordination, the CIA’s covert-action wing…virtually everyone associated with the founding of the National Review was either a former CIA agent or someone in the pay of the CIA. In addition to Buckley, Kendall, and Burnham, that included William Casey, who would go on to become head of the CIA.”[5]

National Review progressively became a covert operation that sought to manipulate Catholics in America for the Neoconservatives. This became very clear during the events leading up the war in Iraq. One critique of National Review, Chris Manion, knew this. “If they [Catholics] don’t by that [weapons of mass destruction],” he said, after seeing what National Review writers were doing, “we’ll threaten to brand them with dark and subterranean and totally unprovable anti-Semitism.”[6] This became very clear when Buckley posited the claim that some of Sobran’s columns were “contextually anti-Semitic.”[7]

Buckley knew that this wasn’t true. In fact, when Podhoretz said that Sobran’s entire journalistic style was ontologically anti-Semitic, Buckley responded by saying that only a few of his columns were anti-Semitic. “By this I mean that if he had been talking, let us say, about the lobbying interests of the Arabs or of the Chinese, he would not have raised eyebrows as an anti-Arab or an anti-Chinese.”

Well, we have a problem here, don’t we? If it is possible to talk about Arabs or Chinese without being anti-Arabs or anti-Chinese, why can’t that principle be applied to Jewish ideologues like Podhoretz? Are Jews above criticism?

In any event, Buckley was the man who actually was working for the masters of the universe. He told Sobran to “stop antagonizing the Zionist crowd.” What probably isolated Sobran, even more, was his view on the so-called Holocaust. He declared:

“I am not, heaven forbid, a ‘Holocaust denier.’ I lack the scholarly competence to be one. … Why on earth is it ‘anti-Jewish’ to conclude from the evidence that the standard numbers of Jews murdered are inaccurate, or that the Hitler regime, bad as it was in many ways, was not, in fact, intent on racial extermination? Surely these are controversial conclusions; but if so, let the controversy rage.”

Sobran also blamed the “Jewish-Zionist powers that be in the United States” for the destruction of the Middle East and the chaos in much of the West. Sobran also argued that Communism is essentially a Jewish phenomenon. For those reasons, he was a full-blown anti-Semite.

But not a single Jewish scholar and historian can refute what Sobran wrote about here. In fact, Jewish academics are bragging about how Jewish subversive movements have turned much of the West upside down. Consider for example Yuri Slezkine of the University of California.

At the very beginning of his study The Jewish Century, Slezkine writes: “The modern age is the Jewish Age, and the twentieth century, in particular, is the Jewish Century.” Slezkine has more interesting things to say: “Modernization,” he continues, “is about everyone becoming Jewish.”[8] Similar sentiments have been echoed by Benjamin Ginsberg, J. J. Goldberg, Nathan Abrams, Josh Lambert, etc.[9] So, it is foolish to say that Sobran was an anti-Semite.

Anyway, Sobran was attacked because he was addressing some of the most pressing issues of our time. And he was pretty good at that. For example, in an article entitled “The Jewish establishment,” he wrote:

In the early 1930s, Walter Duranty of the New York Times was in Moscow, covering Joe Stalin the way Joe Stalin wanted to be covered. To maintain favor and access, he expressly denied that there was a famine in Ukraine even while millions of Ukrainian Christians were being starved into submission. For his work, Duranty won the Pulitzer Prize for journalism. To this day, the Times remains the most magisterial and respectable of American newspapers.

“Now imagine that a major newspaper had had a correspondent in Berlin during roughly the same period who hobnobbed with Hitler, portrayed him in a flattering light, and denied that Jews were being mistreated — thereby not only concealing but materially assisting the regime’s persecution. Would that paper’s respectability have been unimpaired several decades later? There you have an epitome of what is lamely called “media bias…” Not only the persecution of Jews but any critical mention of Jewish power in the media and politics is roundly condemned as “anti-Semitism.”

“But there isn’t even a term of opprobrium for participation in the mass murders of Christians. It’s permissible to discuss the power of every other group, from the Black Muslims to the Christian Right, but the much greater power of the Jewish Establishment is off-limits. That, in fact, is the chief measure of its power: its ability to impose its own taboos while tearing down the taboos of others — you might almost say its prerogative of offending.”

We need men like Sobran again—people who have the balls to say uncomfortable but true things.

Part of this article was first published in September 2017.

  • [1] Joe Sobran, “In Pursuit of Anti-Semitism,” National Review, March 16, 1992.
  • [2] See E. Michael Jones, “Manipulating Catholic Support for the War: The Black Operation Known as ‘Conservatism,’” D. Liam O’Huallachain and J. Forrest Sharpe, eds., Neo-Conned!: Just War Principles: A Condemnation of War in Iraq (Norfolk, VA: IHS Press, 2007), kindle edition.
  • [3] Ibid.
  • [4] Ibid.
  • [5] Ibid.
  • [6] Ibid.
  • [7] Michael McDonald, “Wills watching: A review of Outside Looking In: Adventures of an Observer by Garry Wills,” The New Criterion, June 2011.
  • [8] Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), 1.
  • [9] See Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993); J. J. Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside The American Jewish Establishment (New York: Basic Books, 1997); Nathan Abrams, The New Jew in Film: Exploring Jewishness and Judaism in Contemporary Cinema (Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2012); Josh Lambert, Unclean Lips: Obscenity, Jews, and American Culture (New York: New York University Press, 2013).


We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.


  1. Jonas and Jack are painting the panoramic picture you thought at first were just single paintings on themselve.

  2. Of course, any discussion of this article in particular, and Jews in general is anti-semetic, and most probably hate speech. I will report all of you to my masters at the ADL/JDL/SCLC etc etc. sarcastic? of course i am.

  3. IMO, Voltaire said it best: “If you want to find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” In our case, that would be the Jews.

  4. The Aardvark-Gnosis (Trumpian association with the Jooish Mafia Inc.)
    Excerpt from,
    The Tenth Protocol reaches the theme of From Henry Ford’s archives of the International joo…
    President thus:
    It is this practice of holding a man under obligation which makes it needful on the part of the true publicist to tell the truth and the whole truth about aspirants for public office. It is not enough to say of a candidate that he “began as a poor boy” and then became “successful.” How did he become successful? How explain the “rise” of his fortunes? Sometimes the clue leads deep into the domestic life of the candidate. It may be told of a man, for example, that he helped another out of a scrape by marrying the woman involved and received a sum of money for doing so. It may be told of another that he was implicated by his too friendly relations with another’s wife but was relieved of his predicament by the astute diplomacy of powerful friends, to whom thereafter he felt himself in debt of honor. It is strange that, in American affairs at least, the woman-note is predominant. In our higher offices that has more frequently occurred than any other, oftener than the money-note.
    In European countries, however, where the fact of a man’s being entangled illegitimately with a woman does not carry so heavy a stamp of shame with it, the controlled men have been found to have “pasts” of another character.

    • continued:
      The whole subject is extremely distasteful, but truth has its surgical duties to perform, and this is one of them. When, for example, a pivotal assemblage like that of the Peace Conference is studied, and the men who are most subject to the Jewish influence are isolated, and their past history is carefully traced, there is almost no difficulty whatever in determining the precise moment when they passed over into that fateful condition which, while it did not hinder them of public honors for one hour, made them unchangeably the servants of a power the public did not see. The puzzling spectacle which the observer sees of the great leaders of Anglo-Saxon races closely surrounded and continuously counseled by the princes of the Semitic race, is explained only by knowledge of those leaders’ “past” and those words of the Protocols — “We will manipulate the election of Presidents whose past contains some undisclosed dark affair.”

  5. Our Congress should be investigating the greatest crime of the 21st century committed against our nation, that of 9/11/’01!! Instead they, both parties, are conducting a diversion, a ‘Smoke Screen’, a HOAX, about some Phone calls to the Ukraine! Now ‘Impeachment!’ What B.S.! How many Americans have died because of those Phone calls? How many died because of the pre set, staged collapse, of the W.T.C. Towers #1, #2 and #7? Our Enemies Foreign and Domestic, must be uncovered, our Congress should have the SPINE, GUTS and PATRIOTISM, to go after the 9/11 Terror Attack, PERPETRATORS, with the same drive, enthusiasm, zeal as what they project into the Phone call HOAX!! ASAP!!

  6. The Khazarian Mafia has made the biggest score against the people of the United States, with their attack on the World Trade Center Towers #1,#2 and #7! That attack was planed and executed by the enemies of, the ‘Land of the Free’, FOREIGN and DOMESTIC! Those Towers were pre set, installed with ‘Controlled Demolition Explosive material/Devices’ before any plans have flown into them! That work in itself was a Major Undertaking, logistic, transportation, move, and installation of huge amounts of stuff, material, equipment, explosives! Such a mission couldn’t have been accomplished without one or more of our, Federal Agencies/Securities not noticing it! #7 wasn’t hit, yet came down the same way as the other2!

  7. Jonas E. Alexis is one of the best, if not the best, journalist explaining what is
    happening in the world. I thoroughly look forward to reading each of his articles, as they are informative and not beholden to any disinformation entity. Keep up the heroic work, hopefully to encourage more people of integrity to use their gifts and wake up the slumbering people.

  8. Excellent, well researched, and timely article. Inasmuch as the period for the jews my have been the 20th century, their time is passing, and good riddance. They do brag about being the great destroyers, and if one looks closely at their actions, their actions do seem to bear out their claims. And yes, they do appear to have great hatred for the Goyim.

    Regarding Sandy Hook, I believe it was a hoax, as do many other researchers and historians. With his permission, I tried to post Jim Fetzer’s book (Nobody Died at Sandy Hook), only to be attacked by the Connecticut gang about alleged copyright infringement, and had I not taken the book down, my Internet service provider (GoDaddy) would have taken down my educational website (Highlander.com).

    So, yes, the khazarian mafia control seems to be very strong, as they now control the government and the media, including much of the Internet. If our country is really based on individual freedom and liberty, there is no room for organized gang warfare being imposed on us by the zio-government and the zio-media.

    • For a very short time the US government did acknowledge Sandy Hook to be a drill. Yet the narrative continues as does the false narrative of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 debunked the very next day by a female dutch journalist finding some ot those accused alive and well in their homelands. The demolitionexpert on photo of building 7 died in a mysterious caraccident soon after a journalist called him to ask if he still stood by that expert opinion, years after 9/11. It gets tiring to examine the False Flags and to see the lies and memes continue to determine the fate of Humankind, to rule the Collective. Those debated were given worldpower in WW II if they succeeded drawing the USA into that war. Documents, Docu Europe the Last Battle. Meeting in the Hague soon after WW II they stated clearly their goal was to own the entire world. Noahite laws informs you about the fate of the goyim. Which leads to the question if that is why the US ordered all those guillotines some years ago.

  9. War is just another business model, a racket and plunder of other goyims by goyims and the result goes to the joos, who are not joos at all.

    • Don’t we observe the same convoluted “logic” by those promoting the Sandy Hook Hoax where they are not happy celebrating the evidence that no kids died and the school had been closed, but instead continue down the path of lies insisting that the kids did die as if that were a noble outcome? What they are not admitting is that a five letter obscene word MONEY is behind their evil claims all because of a site called “Go Fund Me”. Are not all those fraudulent dollars in their pockets a noble goal to fight for? I don’t know how many of them are Jewish but certainly some are. Perhaps all? Some folks have been prosecuted for defrauding others via Go Fund Me; why not them? Could it be anti-S to prosecute them?

Comments are closed.