37 Comments

It’s interesting that none of them will ever address the root concern, which is their influence network directly funded by foreign billionaires. They always dismiss the accusation as “crazy, envious, antisemitic.”

At least Richard Hanania admits he is more concerned with GDP then whether or not America has sovereignty.

Expand full comment

They are too high IQ to ever address an argument. They are the smartest people alive. Just ask them, they would love to tell you about it.

Expand full comment

I am not particularly sorry that Claudine Gay was dismissed (but kept her $900.000 Harvard salary) for plagiarism. My first career was in journalism, which I took seriously - and I NEVER copied anyone else's work. I am the Catholic spouse of a smart Jew, and we are the parents of a very bright child. All of us are honest, loyal US citizens. I guess it is nice that Jewish billionaires contribute money in case American military help is needed to aid Israelis in the always-uncertain international environment, but I do not believe the USA needs billions of Jewish dollars to protect its basic values.

Expand full comment

“ I guess it is nice that Jewish billionaires contribute money in case American military help is needed to aid Israelis”

- nice for whom?

Expand full comment

GDP is an actual, real, measurable concern. It’s the most important concern. What do you mean by American sovereignty? Are you a Catholic? Do you have dual loyalties to the Vatican, or are you only loyal to the US? How do you feel about using embryo screening to increase the IQ of the US? Do you oppose it, putting Catholic interests before American interests? How exactly are rich Jewish-AMERICAN billionaires a threat to American sovereignty? Because they have an affinity for a foreign country that is a US ally? Is Chris Brunet, a Canadian citizen, a threat to US sovereignty because of his affinity for Canada? Unlike the US and Israel, Canada is in a position to benefit a fair amount from climate change.

Expand full comment

I am a Catholic. Catholic teaching calls on us to support with honor our families, our communities and our country, so long as it is consistent with the moral law. Embryo screening is an abomination. You may not have a moral compass, but it is wise to have one b/c if you are willing to cede the right to life of the embryo, the fetus, the Palestinian, the Syrian, the Libyan, the Iranian, the weak, the sick, the disabled, the mentally less capable, what happens when you find yourself in a category slated for elimination because you are deemed less than? Catholicism has universal principles recognizing the sacred quality of every human being and their equal inherent worth in the eyes of God. The Talmud seems to value Jews over other people. Zionism certainly values Jews over non-Jews. I recommend you read the book by Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky called "Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel." I recommend you look into Jews seeking protection from criminal prosecution, including child sexual predation and murder, in Israel, availing themself of Israeli citizenship upon arrival. The Vatican provides no such protection for Catholics all over the world. Catholic teaching does not allow us to bear false witness. Catholic teaching has restraint on war to be for purposes of defense and protection of the innocent. Vengeance is not ours, but must be left to God. We are not to take joy in the suffering of others. Catholics will take the Pepsi Challenge against Jews for loyalty to their country and fellow American citizens any time.

Expand full comment

Human life has value, I never denied that. Preimplantation embryos don’t. The US government should value the lives of Americans over foreigners, and put American interests first.

Expand full comment

OK, good, you have a moral code. But you say you draw the line on respecting life once it is implanted? In my moral code, a human embryo can never be free standing in a petri dish or freezer. But what is your moral code based on? How "flexible" is it depending on the circumstances? You don't have to answer, I am not trying to pry. But I am asking fellow Americans to notice that by thinking people could splinter off and found churches better than the one Christ founded (The Reformation) and that we are so brilliant with our understanding of the forces of nature that we don't really need God much now that He has created everything (The "Enlightenment") that we have been lured into a condition of moral relativism that favors the voice and political influence of the jaded, sociopathic and ruthless over the honorable and sincere. If we want to get out of this, we need to examine our value systems individually and how we can have a coherent shared moral code once again in America if we have any hope of surviving the current dissolution of our empire phase without ending in complete might=right tyranny. At least this is what concerns me.

Expand full comment

A preimplantation embryo is not a person. I don’t subscribe to this Vatican First, Christ First view. I prefer America First.

I am pretty consequentialist.

Expand full comment

You declare that a preimplanted embryo is not a person. On what basis? What is a person? If you are a consequentialist, you have to define you view of what is good and bad. Can you build a society on morality where each person decides what the common good is? If the majority says abortion or killing the disabled is ok, does that make it ok? Or should there be a deeper shared foundation lest the sins of pride, greed, sloth tempt the majority into rationalizing evil? John Adams said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." But what was that religion at the time and what has it devolved to since? Will the lack of a coherent shared morality mean the devolution of our society into oligarchic enslavement?

You are clearly not a big fan of The Catholic Church, but isn't it true that the US was founded by people whose roots were in Catholicism? Isn't that more of an organic moral foundation that your consequentialism? America First is a start, but what is America? How do we protect it if we don't know first what it was and examine how we can make it better? For your consideration if you haven't seen these already: https://culturewars.com/news/the-failed-quest-for-american-identity and https://www.unz.com/ejones/cherchez-le-juif-satanism-as-the-hidden-grammar-of-america/

Expand full comment

I really think exposing Israeli influence is futile , at this point

The origins of the American war on Iraq revolve around the United States’ adoption of a war agenda whose basic format was conceived in Israel to advance Israeli interests and was ardently pushed by the influential pro-Israeli American neoconservatives, both inside and outside the Bush administration.

Lots of traditional conservatives saw this coming for years, called it out , and were ruined for doing so

This recent attempt to pin it all on Cheney, then have Cheney 'endorse' Harris is a insteresting ruse.

Nobody has really stood up to 'Israeli influence' since, Bush Sr withheld loan guarantees for settlement building until Israel agreed not to settle new immigrants the West Bank.

Israel had to put a slight curb on settlements for a short period. Israelis blamed Shamir for overplaying his hand with the U.S., and voted him out in 1992

After Bush's 1992 election loss, The Washington Post’s Glenn Frankel wrote, that Bush also “paid a price” for his decision to cast the Israel lobby as counter to U.S. interests.

Thomas Freidman wrote: "This created an arms race with the Democrats, over who could be more pro Israel."

Neocon does not mean much anymore.

They were primarily Jewish Americans that were originally democrats or anti stalin leftists who entered the conservative political world in the 70s . Interestingly they were the 'anti woke' of that era. And on close inspection they were very much aligned with and supported the Lukid party.

Netanyahu is basically the King of the Lukid party. According to some old reporting, he is very close with the Kushner's. Jared would have to give up his bed when Bibi stayed over.

Interestingly, Ron Lauder, put Netanyahu in power. Lauder and Trump have been friends for 50 years

Draw your own conclusions

Trump promoted national ID on Rogan - the next step to a total control grid.

Looks like Trump is the man to lead patriots and conservatives into the digital concentration camp. The theory that you need a digital ID system to stop election fraud or secure border is absolutely not true. Ask the folks who ran these things before digital tech existed. Alas, Rogan agreed - he does not see the trap. Trump does - he is marketing it

Expand full comment

How would I block you on Substack too? Not interested in tin foil hat conspiracies.

Expand full comment

“I am a "conspiracy theorist.” I believe men and women of wealth and power conspire. If you don't think so, then you are what is called "an idiot.” If you believe stuff but fear the label, you are what is called "a coward.”

-- David B. Collum

Expand full comment

Yep, Nick Fuentes is not a serious person.

Expand full comment

did he say anything incorrect in these videos?

what do you disagree with?

Expand full comment

He is basically a Jewish stereotype. Nasally-voiced, gesticulating, slight of constitution, word-smithing, media-manipulating, lacking real-world skills, lacking a productive job. I’ll make sure to invite him to the next Bar Mitzvah party.

Expand full comment

whatever point you are trying to make here, you certainly are not making an argument

Expand full comment

Let me help you parse it logically. My argument is that Nick Fuentes behaves (and looks like) the stereotype he loves to criticize. This is very funny.

Expand full comment

so, nothing incorrect then

got it

Expand full comment

Chris, I've noticed you've replaced your bio pick with one of a dead Hezbollah fighter, and declared your sense of brotherhood to this person who you regard you as a kafir he was alive.

Do you honestly think this is the type of behavior that a mentally healthy 34yr old man would engage in?

Expand full comment

Another little interesting tid bit on Paul Singer

He funded the opposition research that eventually culmated into the nortious 'Steele Dossier'

What a tangled web they weave

Expand full comment

Such low level slop. Do yourself a favor and take a vow of digital poverty. When you feel the urge to poast, give to the poor.

Expand full comment

>poasting

we see you

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Oct 28
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

LOL

Expand full comment

Unsubbed.

Expand full comment

Mr. Brunet, please clarify what you're doing here in a longer post. A.) Do you endorse the views of this Fuentes fellow, of whom I had the fortune to not know about--nor of his alleged popularity--prior? B) If so, why do you also ask us, in the related post about Rufo's piece, to read some gal named Brave and Based, who while she is another a too-harsh and too-assuming critic of Israel, detests Fuentes (as your links to her X account shows) for the overall character of his rhetoric and the emptiness of his tactical friendliness-to-Catholics? C) What is the issue, or set of them, between you and Rufo? It obviously isn't limited to this one Compact article, nor even to the (yes, dismal) fact of Soros money going to Compact, nor is it clear how it relates--if it does-- to your own investigations in Harvard--Fuentes does some speculation on that regarding that one guy's wife, but... D) Which parts of Fuentes' broad charges against Compact, Manhattan Institute, Claremont Institute, Theil, and Rufo do you endorse, and which do you not? (I ask this, incidentally, as someone who, for reasons related to the CI's part in the suppression of the widespread covid-vax harm story, has very frosty relations w/ the Claremont crowd at present, and who by the end of 2025, if they remain unrepentant, may well call for all conservatives to sever ties with the Institute.) E.) Do you find the 'notice how many of them are Jewish?' aspect of Fuentes' aspersions against Claremont acceptable? F.) Will you, while of course still insisting that serious criticisms of how Israel has conducted this war and others are legitimate and must be permitted in the broad conservative coalition, repent of saying (in the piece on Rufo's Compact article) that their conduct in this war has included "blatant acts of genocide"? Choices b/t terms like a "war-mistake", a "war-crime" and an "act of genocide" are very distinct, and progressively require stricter standards of evidence and logic; nor is it irrelevant that the last choice is known to have a particular potency for offending Jews. G.) Do you agree with Fuentes' apparent view that being any kind of Zionist is a pretty bad thing?

Israel-critical conservatives are a fact of life I accept, and to an extent even embrace, even though my judgments differ w/ theirs. But when they veer into Hamas-apologism, or--lesser sins by far--into repetition of P. Buchanan's most clumsy and wide-net moments of attacking neo-con Israel-support, or when they start throwing around the word "genocide," I have to part ways. (Though, I do have a late 2023 post, BTW, of attacking Scott Johnson of PL for pulling out the antisemitism charge far too readily.) God only knows what's really going on with the likes of Candace Owens, and her relations to former employers, and I am very disappointed with Carlson for stumbling into popularizing Darryl Cooper's Churchill-slandering take on WWII, but those are all lesser errors and ugliness-es in my book compared to an embrace of this Fuentes guy. Keep it so his ilk has free speech, sure, make the key points you do on free speech against Rufo, sure, but to actually just let Fuentes take over your stack for a post???

Confused and appalled, Carl Eric Scott

Expand full comment

Chris, this one may be of interest, titled alt-right fag hags exposed, may want to skip the intro: https://odysee.com/@swprs:3/alt-right-fag-hags-exposed-2022:c

Also this on Ali Alexander: https://providencepost.com/ali-akbar-alexander-the-alt-rights-worst-pedophile-grifter/

And this one on Mike Cernovich: https://occidentaldissent.com/2017/03/16/tranny-surprise-w-mike-cernovich/

Expand full comment

Unfollow chris brunet

Expand full comment

Thank you for standing up for truth. May God protect you.

Expand full comment

A deaf subscriber asked you *not* to post without a transcript? I could see asking for a transcript, but keep it from others if I can't hear it? Did you ask if he or she might just happen to work for the IDF unit 8200? Whoever they are, their priority is clearly not standing up to Jewish domination over our society.

Expand full comment

Links all blocked.

Expand full comment