Is Jewish humor basically different from that of Gentiles? Do motion pictures produced, written, and directed primarily by Jews, differ basically from films made by Gentile artists of the medium? With little room for doubt, the answer to both of these questions, in my opinion, is YES.
Consider first, the concept of comedy. There is a scene in the latest Zucker, Zucker and Abraham produced flic, “The Naked Gun,” for instance, that exemplifies the ambiance of Jewish humor.
A young woman, standing rather high on a ladder, is apparently looking for something in an attic. The leading actor in the production is standing at the foot of the ladder. From the angle of the viewer, he could be looking right up her dress. “Nice beaver,” he casually comments. A moment later, she hands down a stuffed animal – a beaver. Now most Americans know that the word “beaver” is euphemistically used in a descriptive sense that has only a tantalizing relationship with the animal in question. Hence, the “humor” in the situation.
In truth, this is a splendid example of Jewish humor. It is cheap, sordid, childish, and the kind of comedy that belongs to the Marx Brothers, the Three Stooges, Buddy Hackett, and numerous other Jewish comics. Curiously, most Gentile comedians, from Richard Pryor to Robin Williams can use forbidden words and off-color jokes, and still be charmingly acceptable. On the other hand, there are people like Lebanese Catholic Danny Thomas and the late Myron Cohen (there are some decent Jewish comedians) who are able to delight audiences for lengthy periods of time without using a single off-color remark.
For the most pertinent perspective on what generally passes for Jewish humor, however, one need look no further than an appearance on the Johnny Carson show by Jewish actor Walter Matthau a few years back. The very first thing Matthau said when he sat down was, “My wife told me not to tell a toilet joke.” And then he promptly told a toilet joke.
For a revealing perspective on the Jewish approach to films dealing mostly with non-Jews (specifically: white Gentiles), a little fantasizing might help. Let us suppose that a Gentile-controlled film studio in, say, Russia, is going to produce a number of scripts dedicated to providing the world with Gentile versions of the universal Jewish lifestyle. Ergo, consider the following scenarios:
The action of production number one – a comedy in which many of the scenes are quick skits having nothing to do with the loosely running story-line – takes place on a jumbo jet. In one scene, two stereotypical Jewish children (George Burns and Barbara Streisand look-alikes, perhaps), about ten years of age and extravagantly dressed, are seated together. The boy is puffing on a cigar. He offers one to the little girl. She accepts; but when he starts to clip the end for her, she reaches for the cigar, saying, “Oh no. I prefer my cigars UNcircum-cised, like my men.” In another scene, we meet the pilot, a stereotypical hook-nosed Jew wearing a self-conscious grin, as if he has just been caught eating something forbidden. He is soon disclosed as a child molester due to his oblique references to his sexual preferences for little boys.
The locale of the second picture is a small Israeli town on the West Bank. The town policeman has killed an Arab during the commission of a crime. The Arab’s brother, a noted terrorist, sends word to the policeman that he, along with some of his henchmen, are coming to avenge his brother’s “murder.” Needing help, the policeman turns to the townspeople. All of them – including his former military commander, his service buddies, his relatives, his neighbors, even his wife – are too cowardly to offer him any assistance. The film climaxes with a battle in which the policeman, facing the Arabs alone, fights to victory.
In production number three, a wealthy Israeli newspaper owner expresses his opposition in editorials to the refusal of the government to deal with the Palestinians, to the brutalization of the Palestinians, and to the continued reliance on American aid. In response to his “anti-Semitic” views, powerful Israelis produce a film viciously smearing him as one of the worst human beings imaginable: cold, ruthless, friendless, despicable, with no sense of decency and fairness; and incapable of finding love, short of picking up women on the street. In fact, his soul is so empty, the only comforting thing on his mind as he dies, is the name of a boyhood toy.
The next movie is designed to degrade the Israeli military. The locale: an air base somewhere in Israel. The base commander is a psychopath who wants to shoot any serviceman with dust on his shoes, or a single undone button. At his elbow at all times is a rat-faced little guy ready to cite chapter and verse from military regulations whenever the general goes off the deep end. E.g.: “Oh no, General. We can’t shoot him for belching!” The Colonel in charge of supplies, meanwhile, is deeply involved in the black market. In order to cover up his activities, he makes a deal with the Arabs to blow up his own supply depot, thus ensuring that the missing items will be listed as having been destroyed. His black market associate among the enlisted men is an incipient Nazi who acts like a storm trooper. The base rabbi is a coward and a bumbling fool who can’t hit the ground with his hat. And the rest of the characters are assorted criminal types and sexual perverts.
And now a film dealing with the activities taking place within a large but modern Israeli company that employs several vice presidents and numerous young people, including many pretty girls. The most urgent business on the minds of the managerial staff, however, appears to be the seducing of young female employees. Without the slightest shred of common decency, they promise the girls everything for their favors, and give them nothing in return. To avoid the public eye, as it were, the VP’s make a deal with an unmarried male employee for the purpose of using his dwelling for their numerous sexual liaisons.
Film number six belongs to the anti-law-and-order movie genre.
The sheriff of a small Israeli town and his deputies, capture a vicious but charismatic Arab criminal, and incarcerate him in the local jail. More interested in gaining political power than in doing his job, the sheriff is obsessively ambitious and ruthlessly amoral. Most of the townspeople – with one of the exceptions being the local newspaper editor – are as corrupt and indifferent to decency as the sheriff. As the result of his arrogant treatment of the newspaper man, his indifference to the welfare of his men, and his plans to use the capture of the criminal for his own political gain, his deputies turn against him and help the criminal escape from jail. The last thing the deserted sheriff sees as he stands in the middle of the street screaming to the high heavens about betrayal, are his deputies driving off into the sunset with the Arab.
Many more examples could be cited in this motion picture “hit list;” but to continue, I suspect, would be akin to beating the proverbial dead horse.
The purpose of these satirical exercises has been to emphasize by example how six major American films – “Airplane,” “High Noon,” “Citizen Kane,” “Catch 22,” “The Apartment,” and “The Posse” – would appear to the world at large if all of the ugly people involved in the stories were Jews rather than white Gentiles. For those who are fortunate enough not to have wasted good money to see “Airplane,” a couple of incidents from that flic will clarify my “jumbo jet” scenario: A handsome Anglo pilot asks a little boy if he has ever seen a grown man naked; and a little blonde girl comments that she likes her coffee black, like her men. Obviously, deliberately slanted writing of this sort reaches outside the perimeters of socially acceptable comedy for propaganda messages that are more closely related to racial denigration than to entertainment and enlightenment.
Is the Hollywood Writer’s Guild “practically a Semitic closed shop,” as a Jewish publication reported a few years back? I really don’t know. Considering the large number of movies and TV programs that portray Anglos in the most negative ways, however, it isn’t difficult to conclude that not only is the number of Sammy Glicks in Hollywood far out of proportion to their numbers in our society, a goodly number of them are deliberately using the propaganda medium of the motion picture to express their contempt for, and hatred of, the American majority.
For the very best in prime, Grade A, racial denigration, I refer the reader to “Soap,” a TV series starring a large, white Gentile family, whose members, without exception, are obscene caricatures of human beings. The only decent person in the entire household – no coincidence, to be sure – is the Black manservant.
In other words, the savaging of Anglos appears to be one of the primary occupations of the Sammy Glicks of Hollywood. We are constantly being portrayed as sex-crazed, power-warped, minorily-hating, immoral polluters of sane society. “Nashville,” “Nasty Habits,” “Roots,” “Little Big Man,” “Dallas,” “A Woman Called Moses,” “A Wedding,” “Mandingo,” “Buffalo Bill and the Indians,” “Carnal Knowledge,” “Joe,” “The Border,” “Alamo Bay,” “Mississippi Burning,” and “The Chase” merely scratch the surface of the parade of Hollywood motion pictures that could all be subtitled “Anglos You Love To Hate.”
Of all the world’s social systems, the Western world of the white Gentile is so distinctive in character and imposing in its duration, that it could logically be described as the most “human” of societies, and the most “civil” of civilizations. Nonetheless, what we frequently hear from a disproportionate number of minority members – intellectual terrorists who destroy with words instead of bombs – are public declarations via novels, text books and film productions, to the effect that the “white race” is the cancer of the human race.
Always contributing to the foundation upon which the individual minority racist builds, is the very effective method of media propagandizing known as saturation programming. We Americans are regularly bombarded throughout the year, on both commercial and public television, with guilt-producing dramas, documentaries, and news-film anthologies, that are supposed to “educate” us about past and present “white supremacist,” “anti-Semitic,” and “anti-civil rights” activism. For forty years, Nazism has been kept alive by a continual pageantry of programs portraying old Nazis, ex-Nazis, resurgent Nazis, neo-Nazis, and even cloned Nazis; and the latest in a lengthy procession of assembly-line Holocaust productions is a story about an SS officer who undergoes plastic surgery so that he can assume the identity of a Jew. What next… an animated Holocaust extravaganza starring Irving Rabbit?
If the white race was generally as worthless and corrupt as the holier-than-thou, always wronged and never wrong, minorities would have us believe, there would be no Western civilization; no great art, literature, music, or architecture; no great cathedrals, art galleries, libraries, universities, or hospitals; no concept of individual rights; Nothing – except a terrifying primitive world filled with collectivism and tribalism.
Sammy Glick found the freedom and opportunity in predominantly white, Christian America to achieve all possible success. And what does he give us in return? Out of proportion to his numbers in our society – the significant words are, to repeat, OUT OF PROPORTION – he gives us an overwhelming lust to defile and destroy our civilization and culture. Think about that the next time you see one of Sammy Glick’s productions.
SOURCE: The Liberty Bell, March 1989