The Saudi Journalist and “Muh Values”

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
October 16, 2018

I’m sitting here loving witnessing the collapse of Saudi Arabia. I really hate these people.

But it’s a little bit like #MeToo. I love #MeToo, because it destroys Jews, but I don’t agree with the underlying premise that you shouldn’t pay women for sex or accept sexual favors in exchange for promotions.

Just so, I don’t believe you shouldn’t torture and chop-up journalists. That is the least of what these people deserve.

But let’s take a step back from that for a second to all of these people attacking Trump over Saudi Arabia. This is the media doing this, primarily, claiming that Trump has “enabled” the Saudis to be bad people by not enforcing a foreign policy based on “our values.”

This is the same media that falsified all that evidence to get the US into the Iraq war, which killed however many hundreds of thousands of people. That was the New York Times, remember? It was the kike Judith Miller, who printed a bunch of fake news about how Saddam was planning to nuke America, who guaranteed that that war went through.

This bitch talking about aluminum tubes, Colin Powell brings fake anthrax to the UN, bing bang boom.

There is now no question at all about this – the Iraq war was based on fake news, with the media colluding with the “intelligence community” to start that war.

Then there are all these other wars the US has fought for all of these decades. No one has explained WWII yet, let alone Vietnam or all those weird drug wars in Latin America.

Beyond that, we are allied with all of these other countries which commit all these atrocities, most notably Israel.

Saudi Arabia itself has been a US ally forever, and it has always killed dissidents. Furthermore, why is this one journalist’s life so much more important than the lives of the 50,000 dead Yemenis in the war of aggression Saudi is fighting against them?

The bottom line here is that “our values” is not a standard by which to decide foreign policy. It is an absurd joke for the US to claim to be some arbiter of humanist morality – and even if it were true that we are the goodest of all good boys, using that as the basis of foreign policy would be stupid.

So on some level, even while I hate the Saudis, allowing the media to claim a scalp here makes me a little bit uncomfortable. I think it is clearly an “own goal” like the #MeToo movement, but the #MeToo movement is what paved the way for the Kavanaugh debacle (which could have ended badly).

My point: I don’t want to see right-wingers supporting the narrative of “our foreign policy should be determined by vague moral principles that we ourselves do not uphold” simply because they hate the Saudis and all of this endless Middle East nonsense.

Rand Paul is out there using this, saying “we shouldn’t be sending foreign aid and weapons to a country that murders journalists” – but he was already calling for the same thing, before any journalist was murdered, for much better, real reasons.

It is great that Saudi is falling apart over this. But I have seen the Jews very excited about it, and I think they are excited because they are setting a precedent.

This could potentially be used against Russia, Brazil and others. Which is why I think Trump is so hesitant. Plus maybe he also had some larger scheme he was working. I assume he had some larger scheme. But I don’t think it was a good scheme. The Saudi-Trump relationship was a Jared Kushner production, and it never should have been a thing in the first place.

Trump said during the campaign that Saudis funded terrorists who kill Americans and that we should cut them off. That was the much better position. If he had held that position, he wouldn’t be in a place where he has to vouch for a lunatic.

American foreign policy should be based exclusively on what is good for America.


There should be no second, third or fourth consideration.

Most especially, the lives of brown people, journalists and brown journalists should not ever be a consideration.