Jews Cyber Lynch NYT Journalist for Accidentally Humanizing Pro-White Activist

Eric Striker
Daily Stormer
November 26, 2017

A journalist for the New York Times recently interviewed Tony Hovater of the Traditionalist Worker Party to ask about whether he eats babies and how he plans to bring about Helter Skelter.

Instead, the reporter discovered that he’s just a normal guy with a different political opinion.

Instead of killing the story or lying (standard Judenpresse protocol), reporter Richard Fausset (probably an honest liberal Gentile) transcribed his conversations with Tony about his dreams, his political awakening, his daily routine, his social life and his hobbies.

Because Fausset didn’t defame Tony, blue Jude star twitter is coming to his door step with pitchforks and torches.

Holy smokes, I haven’t seen Jews this mad in a long time!

This bugman either took too much speed or lost his mind over this. Here is his tweet thread with around 30 consecutive entries on this article!

The article in question, titled “A Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland” is already politically prejudiced against Tony in the title. These Jews aren’t angry that Fausset is endorsing a nationalist activist’s ideas, they’re mad that he isn’t being more demagogic and dehumanizing.

The task of journalists working on these alt-right hit-pieces isn’t to “learn more” about political dissidents, it’s to portray us in a light that convinces the public that it is ok for the system to censor, imprison and kill us. Anything less draws the ire of Jews!

Which is why Fausset had so many problems getting this story through his editor to begin with.

Here was compelled to write a semi-apology shortly after his article was published.

New York Times:

There is a hole at the heart of my story about Tony Hovater, the white nationalist and Nazi sympathizer.

Why did this man — intelligent, socially adroit and raised middle class amid the relatively well-integrated environments of United States military bases — gravitate toward the furthest extremes of American political discourse?

After I had filed an early version of the article, an editor at The Times told me he felt like the question had not been sufficiently addressed. So I went back to Mr. Hovater in search of answers. I still don’t think I really found them. I could feel the failure even as Mr. Hovater and I spoke on the phone, adding to what had already been hours of face-to-face conversation in and around his hometown New Carlisle, Ohio.

Mr. Hovater was exceedingly candid with me — often shockingly so — but it seems as though his worldview was largely formed by the same recombinant stuff that influences our mainstream politics. There were exceptions, of course: I saw, on his bookshelf, two volumes of Helena Blavatsky’s “The Secret Doctrine,” 19th-century work of esoteric spiritualism whose anti-Semitism influenced Nazi thinking.

But even if I had called Mr. Hovater yet again — even if we had discussed Blavatsky at length, the way we did his ideas about the Federal Reserve Bank — I’m not sure it would have answered the question.

What makes a man start fires?

In other words, there is nothing unusual about the figure he is studying in his piece. There is no “answer” for why he thinks like he does other than he found ethnic nationalism to be the most intellectually sound worldview.

If identity politics aren’t a pathology when Jews practice it, why does it have to be for whites?

A contradiction any honest and well-meaning thinking man will scoff at.

There you have your answer Mr. Fausset. Your critics know it full well, which is why they hate your innocent honesty!