Archives for posts with tag: anti-Muslim

Those following Ideological Content Analysis from its inception in 2012 may have noticed a quickening harshness and radicalization of the perspective of the author of these reviews, and a more aggressive willingness to confront the ugly. Looking back at some of those posts of two years ago in the light of subsequent revelations, he realizes with some embarrassment the inadequacy of several of his earlier analyses.

One case that particularly grieves him is his comparatively safe approach to discussing The Dark Knight Rises (2012), a film which – he is now convinced – is of the utmost significance to those sensitive to the Jewish Question. The revaluation came as the result of watching – yes, he is not afraid to confess – a YouTube video by conspiracy hound MrGeorgeJettison (also known as Jim How and Pmtmr). Jettison’s asides and embellishments are admittedly somewhat silly, but his central insight – that billionaire Batman (Christian Bale) stands for Jewish power, and that Bane (Tom Hardy), rather than merely being a socialist demagogue, represents the resistance to this power – is entirely convincing.

Bane is a paranoid Jewish money master’s idea of a populist, a man of the people bent on breaking the internationalist financial power that has its capital in New York (depicted as Gotham in the film). He represents a conflation of leftist class warfare politics and the threat of a National Socialist awakening, falling somewhere between Zuccotti Park and Nuremberg. His cult of fanatical followers, furthermore, looks forward to a spiritual experience they significantly call “the fire”, no doubt with reference to the “Holocaust“.

Bane’s revolution is the Gentile Spring, an impertinence prompting the bat-like avenger, a vampiric profiteer of the military-industrial complex, to swoop to the rescue of his fellow financial predators on Wall Street when Bane essays a program that can be interpreted as a monetary reform. Batman, who suffers the loss of his fortune as a result of Bane’s activities, is a formidable creature of the night who relies on secrecy for his effectiveness, so that Bane’s discovery of his identity and nocturnal nature poses a very real threat to Batman’s existence and that of his parasitic kind.

Also significant is Miranda (Marion Cotillard), a character later revealed to be one of Bane’s collaborators. She is Middle Eastern in origin, grew up in appallingly harrowing prison conditions – much like Palestinians since the Nakba – and can be seen to personify the righteous vengeance of militant Islam. Actress Marion Cotillard was almost certainly cast in this role because of the mole she sports in the center of her forehead, a feature bearing some resemblance to the zabiba, or “prayer bump” on the foreheads of pious Muslims resulting from repeated bowing to the ground.

Marion Cotillard in The Dark Knight Rises

Marion Cotillard, terrorist temptress

What becomes apparent from The Dark Knight Rises is that the Jews fear a united front against Talmudic supremacy – a coalition of western man and Arab against the vampire power that dictates policies from Gotham. This being the case, one question remains.

Bane, where art thou?


Zio-harpy Debbie Schlussel, who has charged that Hollywood Jews are moldering in a “pan-Islamic slumber“, and badgered Jason Alexander about what she alleged were his Islamo-Nazi terrorist connections, was understandably irate with director Peter Berg when he made The Kingdom (2007), a film which, while reinforcing aspects of the War on Terror, made an effort to humanize the typical Saudi citizen.

Half-Jewish Berg, perhaps stung by this questioning of his Zionist bona fides, went on to direct Battleship (2012), an unabashed advertisement for American military recruitment on behalf of the Jew World Order. So as to be absolutely clear as to where he stands geopolitically, Berg even gave an interview to an Israeli journalist to promote Battleship, during which he referred to the possibility of an Iran with nuclear weapons as the most pressing crisis presently facing the planet and called his interviewer a draft dodger for not joining the IDF.

Berg’s most recent contribution to post-9/11 cinema is Lone Survivor, an Afghanistan war horror hailed by Fox News as “a great service to this nation” in its celebration of the goy cannon fodder who put their lives on the line to, as Berg words it, “protect you, to protect me” against “legitimate evil”. The “evil” in the film is jihadist Ahmad Shah (Yousuf Azami), whom Lone Survivor explicitly dubs the “bad guy” for the benefit of the cognitively impaired in the audience. Operation Red Wings deploys Marcus Luttrell (Mark Wahlberg) and his crack team of hardcore Navy SEALs to assassinate Shah, coddle the still-toddling Afghan “democracy”, and so secure the CIA’s investment in Afghanistan’s booming opium crop – though Lone Survivor, naturally, neglects to mention this last point.

Horribly boring exposition introduces viewers to a group of indistinguishable, unshaven, and dull-eyed muscleheads who lounge around and act like boastful frat boys between forays behind enemy lines. Israel’s errand boys, unfortunately, get into a kosher pickle when sent to execute Operation Red Wings. Shah’s Taliban army learns of the SEALs’ location, and when their Raytheon-enriching communications equipment goes on the blink, Marcus and crew are outnumbered and stranded, pinned to a hellish position on the side of a goat-infested mountain.

From this point on, Lone Survivor is almost entirely action, most of it unimaginatively realized, with shaky cam, speed-up/slow-down gimmickry, and first-person shooter POV shots with zombie-like Muslims in the cross-hairs. The characters are unlikable, their “fuck”-sprinkled dialogue doing little to humanize them, and their mission is frankly an unsupportable tyranny, so that one almost longs for the Taliban to win and kill off the American invaders. The film becomes more engrossing once Luttrell is left the last man of his team to continue to make his way to safety, as at this point Lone Survivor shifts from being a war adventure to a more archetypal struggle of one man to survive against hostile odds.

3 out of 5 possible stars. ICA’s advice: watch Rescue Dawn (2006) instead.


Ideological Content Analysis indicates that Lone Survivor is:

8. Pseudo-Christian. Navy SEAL Mike (Battleship‘s Taylor Kitsch) wears a cross tattoo on one of the arms he uses to kill on command.

7. Pro-miscegenation. End credits feature footage of a white soldier kissing his Asian bride.

6. Cronyist, putting in a good word for more military-industrial pork. “Limited resources, chief. There ain’t enough Apaches.”

5. Pro-drug. Several beers are mentioned as code names for nodes in Operation Red Wings. See, too, remark on opium above. Keep those cattle sappy and happy.

4. Anti-Muslim. Decapitation-happy “Tally” and mascara-wearing “bad guy” Ahmad Shah represents the Muslim menace ably.

3. Pro-military. An opening credits montage of Navy SEALs being trained, which is to say, tortured, to become thoughtless murder machines, essentially serves as a J.W.O. mercenary recruitment commercial. As with Berg’s toy-to-movie adaptation Battleship, the writer-director delights in the idea of plastic American soldiers for Jews to hold under their magnifying lens, watching them melt under foreign suns. A wimpy cover of David Bowie’s song “Heroes” stinks up the end credits photo montage of the men portrayed in the film.

2. Imperialist. The Taliban is a threat to world security, Lone Survivor would have viewers believe, because it promotes fundamentalist Islam, chops off a few heads, and forces its women not to dress like whores. The truth, however, is that many of these are just men trying to keep their country from going the way of the Jewnited States of Slum-merica, with whiny minorities running the show, social engineers and feminist riffraff ripping families apart, and Marxists undermining the cultural pillars supporting traditional ways of life. The neoconservative program, however, calls for Afghanistan to embrace diversity, drugs, pornography, sex reassignment surgery, Sarah Silverman, managerial government, and the drone-patrolled surveillance state – in short, Jewish World Imperium.

1. Zionist/anti-human. Disturbingly, Berg acknowledges that the strength of the book on which Lone Survivor is based is its divorcing of the Afghanistan war from politics, and its celebration of the alleged heroism of the band-of-brothers mentality that sustains its combatants. Lone Survivor, in other words, promotes the utmost nihilism, proposing that viewers should not concern themselves so much with why Taliban fighters must be killed, or why Afghanistan continues to be occupied, but rather with the relentless, Israel-licking devotion with which goy cattle “heroes” commit the mass murder. “You are never out of the fight,” Luttrell says at the end of the film, instilling in the audience the suggestion that America’s crusade against the evildoers, wherever they may dwell, will continue indefinitely.


Dislike Ideological Content Analysis on Facebook or follow Rainer Chlodwig von Cuck on Twitter or Google+.

2008’s Taken was a great neoconservative action hit and a perfect crystallization of hawkish Republican fantasy.  The marriage of the action film genre with this particular phase of American politics is natural, neoconservatism being in essence the application of the crowd-pleasing 1980s Golan-Globus sensibility to foreign policy; and Taken, with its Commando-esque story of scoundrelly Muslims kidnapping an American innocent to be auctioned as a harem slave and her father then unilaterally invading their space to raise some major havoc in retrieving her, was the ideal demonstration of the subgenre’s potential.

Now Taken 2 – or, as I prefer to dub it, Look Who’s Taken Too – takes up with the same characters having a new international adventure, but not every element that made the original work, unfortunately, is still in place.  The first sign that things have changed for the worse is that the opening credits roll (or jerk and wobble, rather) over American caskets coming back from overseas – a reminder that the War on Terror hasn’t exactly been cheap or easy.  Far from being a discouragement, however, the purpose of these death cargo shots is presumably to rouse Average Joe Republican’s xenophobic spite for proper appreciation of the white-on-brown beatdowns and bloodbaths that follow over the next hour-and-a-half.

It turns out that the surviving relatives of the Albanian slave traders exterminated in the first film actually have the nerve to hold a grudge and resolve to exact the mother of all revenges against the perpetually squinting Neeson (who I assume has eye trouble and was therefore forgivably incapable of reading the ridiculous script before signing onto the project).  The Albanians, thankfully, are a considerate sort of terrorists, and speak to each other in English for American moviegoers’ convenience.  Their plot to capture Neeson is sweetened when his daughter and ex-wife surprise him by showing up in Istanbul where he’s been working as a security expert.  In the event, Neeson and the ex-missus are the ones who get – gasp! – Taken Too, leaving the ditzy daughter in a position to help her father escape.

All of this is interesting, at least in terms of Look Who’s Taken Too‘s politics, as the revenge scenario acknowledges the existence of the phenomenon of foreign policy blowback.  Not one to back down from a hard punch in the face from reality, however, Neeson just goes all MacGuyver and Houdini and James Bond on the bastards, using a miniature cell phone he has hidden in his pants to call his daughter and hold an extended tactical briefing, giving her a byzantine set of instructions involving a map, geometrical formulations, and grenades thrown at random onto Istanbul rooftops so they can pinpoint each other’s location – none of which raises the suspicions of his guards, most of whom are taking a break from their plot to piously watch Osama bin Laden’s favorite sport, soccer, on tv.  The biggest unintentional smirk comes when Neeson instructs his daughter to try to get to the American embassy, because (the Benghazi debacle not having occurred yet when this movie was made), he assures her, “You’ll be safe there.”

Once he’s loose there’s no stopping Neeson, the one-man shock-and-awe operation.  The small businessmen of Istanbul emerge as the real and unsung victims of the story, with self-important Americans stealing clothes and cab rides, wiping out street vendors, blowing up cars and rooftops, and generally being rude and criminally inconsiderate tourists the whole time they’re there.  The Turks have it coming, though.  Their streets and people are dim and dirty, so that it doesn’t matter so much if they get trashed; and their hotel concierges and police are corrupt and in league with the Albanian white-slavers, so that little sympathy would seem to be in order for the country as a whole.


Neeson goes through such a gauntlet of fisticuffs and gunplay to get to his daughter that, by the end of the film, he actually appears to be experiencing War on Terror fatigue.  Having vanquished all of the grandfatherly (and not very scary) villain’s disposable brood of brown bad guys, he announces that he’s tired of all the fighting and offers the cornered top man a chance at a truce.  He will throw down his weapon and leave in peace if the man agrees to an end of the vendetta-driven cycle of killing.  But what is this?  Has Neeson seen the error of America’s ways and pussied out in favor of Ron Paul all of a sudden?  Hardly.  Naturally, the Albanian agrees to the deal, but immediately proceeds to show himself unworthy of Neeson’s disingenuous show of trust, necessitating that he, too, like his minions, be given a quick lethal dose of export democracy in action, and proving that Muslims can never, ever, under any circumstances, be trusted, and have to be monitored (or occupied, preferably) at all times.


Easily the most ludicrous scene in Look Who’s Taken Too, the ending is unsatisfactory and anticlimactic – somewhat like the War on Terror itself: high on build-up and the body count, but pitiably low in appeal and payoff in the final analysis.  Overall, this is as worthy a sequel as probably should have been expected – particularly when considering that it was directed by someone calling himself “Olivier Megaton”.  A fundamental weakness relative to Taken is that the sequel dispenses with the urgent countdown gimmick that made the first film so suspenseful, and that the idea of a kidnapped pair of divorced parents simply isn’t quite as compelling as an imminently Arab-threatened cherry.

Much of the film, too, both action and drama, also feels less immediate and more obviously staged than Taken.  With the exception of an Albanian’s threat to deliver the daughter into “the lowest brothel”, where she will be used until she is like a piece of abused meat that even a dog wouldn’t want – I laughed at that – the dialogue is unimaginative, and the fight scenes are overly choppy, confusing, and full of disorienting quick cuts – no doubt to obscure the fact that Neeson is way too old a gent to be doing all this stuff – but Look Who’s Taken Too still manages to deliver the sorts of cheap thrills that gave the original’s fans erections.  I’ll generously grant this one 3.5 of 5 possible crypto-fascistic crescent-stars for holding my interest throughout.  Somehow, though, I’m not as eagerly anticipating the inevitable sequel, Look Who’s Taken Now, in which the family pet gets dognapped by Red Chinese restauranteurs.

Ideological Content Analysis indicates that Look Who’s Taken Too is:

4. Anti-miscegenation.  These ones likes it rough.

3. Pro-family.  Neeson will do whatever it takes to protect his daughter, who actually hopes to facilitate the romantic reconciliation of her parents.  The new guy in Mom’s life has turned out to be a grade-A jerk.  (Expect Look Who’s Taken Now to end or begin with a touching, tearful wedding ceremony.)

2. Neoconservative/war-ambivalent.  The impression conveyed is ultimately one of nihilistic resignation at partial foreign policy failure but overall unrepentance.

1. Xenophobic/racist/anti-Muslim.  Even the women in the streets leer sinisterly from under their head coverings.


Russia, the West, and the world


Nature Has Us In Immutable Checkmate...

The Alternative Right

Giving My Alt-Right perspective

Logos Literature

ordo ab chao

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭


Just another site


Human Biodiversity, IQ, Evolutionary Psychology, Epigenetics and Evolution

Christopher Othen

Bad People, Strange Times, Good Books

Historical Tribune

The Factual Review

Economic & Multicultural Terrorism

Delves into the socioeconomic & political forces destroying our Country: White & Christian Genocide.

Ashraf Ezzat

Author and Filmmaker

ProphetPX on WordPress

Jesus-believing U.S. Constitutionalist EXPOSING Satanic globalist SCAMS & TRAITORS in Kansas, America, and the World at-large. Jesus and BIBLE Truth SHALL PREVAIL!

Two Hundred Years Together

A History of the Russians and the Jews

maddoggbuttkickingbrown's real truth!

Getting at the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth!