https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment/news/decades-of-sexual-harassment-accusations-against-harvey-weinstein/ar-AAsXGcS
This is, of course, nothing new. Hollywood has
always been run by decadent, debased, and deracinated Jews ; members of The Tribe who live
like pigs and use women for sex release.
And these Messias-Deniers have, sadly,
triumphed over The USCCB who lost their
nerve to fight them and now just want to be their friends.
Here is an excerpt from The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and its impact on World History.
The thing which Dresner found 'most disturbing,' according to Gertel, was 'secularism,' the thing
whose triumph Pfeffer praised. Pfeffer was an
ardent opponent of the Legion of Decency
and the Hollywood production code (as well as the architect of the legal strategies which
drove prayer from the public schools and which deprived Catholic grade schools of
government aid). Dresner complained about the evaporation of Christian faith and
morals in America. Dresner felt that the fact that America was becoming more pagan
was having an adverse effect on American Jews. Perhaps more than any other one
person, Leo Pfeffer was responsible for that evaporation of faith and morals from the
pubic square in America. Unlike Leo Pfeffer,
who had good things to say about just about
every aspect of cultural and moral subversion,
Dresner saw the consequences that Jews
like Pfeffer were creating and wondered 'what
would happen throughout America if Jews
would begin to say: I will not produce this film,
or show this movie, or publish this book,
or write this magazine article because it is
perverse and destructive of human values. I
will not sell this item because it is shoddy and
will not last.'
Dresner felt that Jews were better off, spiritually at least, in the ghettos of Eastern Europe. Now
that they had arrived in just about every sense of the word in America, he was afraid that they had become 'messengers who forget the message':
For centuries the Jews, shut up in their ghettos, perfected their souls before God and
had something to say to mankind. But no one listened. Now, Jews have the ears of non- Jews on
every level of society. What a tragedy if now that the gentiles are listening, the Jews have nothing
to say.
When Families appeared, this gentile was
listening, because he felt that this Jew had
something to say. Not everyone felt that way
about Families. His daughters wondered
why he had written such a 'harsh and graphic
and judgmental book? Why not write a
nice and uplifting book, like the ones you used to write?' Their judgment is understandable.
Families is harsh in its judgment of American
Jews and their cultural
heroes. Dresner singles out Isaac Bashevis
Singer and Woody Allen for particular
condemnation because of their contemptuous
attitude toward things Jewish. In
wondering why Singer is so popular among
American Jews and why his portrayal of
Polish Jews as sexual degenerates had evoked
no protest, Dresner levels a jeremiad of
biblical proportions against American Jews,
a group which he feels,
have made a caricature out of Judaism, not only by the vulgarism and crass
commercialism that pervades their communal
life, but, more to the point, by too often
abdicating the intellectual life of the faith of
Israel to the fads of the time. The true creed
of many American Jews, especially the
intellectuals, has become whatever happens at
the moment to be 'in' - Marxism, deconstruction, consciousness-raising, permissiveness, liberation, cults, sexual experimentation, etc. (pp. 190-1).
If 'the traditional family is under siege' in
America, it is largely because of the influence of
what Dresner calls 'the Hollywood crowd,' a
group of people who praise 'rebellion, self-
fulfillment, and promiscuity' and a 'debased view of the human body and spirit' which
finds acceptance by 'none of the great religions
of the world ~ and certainly not
Judaism.' The Hollywood film, according to Dresner, has become a 'school from which
one neither graduates nor needs to leave home
to attend.' That school had a profound
effect on American attitudes and behavior in the second half of the 20th century.
According to Dresner, any study of the films
which got produced from 1945 to 1985
would reveal 'a radical shift in values,' one
which turned the world upside down.
'Hollywood came to adopt a permissive,
value-free attitude in the course of a few
decades,' and when it went down the drain, it
dragged the rest of America with it. 'The
underground has taken over. ... the avant-garde
has become the man on the street.
Bohemia is Broadway. The filthy jokes formerly
restricted to burlesque houses and
certain nightclubs' are now available on 'films and TV for the millions. Las Vegas is no
longer a city but a condition' (pp. 316-7).
Hollywood, in short, got corrupted around 1945
and is now responsible for the moral decline of
American culture.
Dresner's critique of Hollywood, however, is not as pointed as it needs to be. To say that
'the Hollywood elite' came to adopt 'a permissive, value-free attitude in the course of a
few decades' from 1945 to 1985 is not only not
true, it misses certain salient points. First
of all, the Hollywood elite was then and is now
overwhelmingly Jewish. Secondly, the
Jews who ran Hollywood always had this
'permissive, value-free attitude' when it came
to matters venereal. Beginning in the '20s, the
outcry against Hollywood's subversion of
morals was so great that various forms of
legislation ~ federal, state and local ~ were
proposed as an antidote. As a way of heading off this legislation, Hollywood's Jews in
1934 entered into a voluntary agreement with the Legion of Decency, a Catholic
operation. That agreement was known as the
Production Code. The Catholics forced the
issue by organizing boycotts at a time when the
film industry was reeling from the effects
of the stock market crash and their heavy
indebtedness to the nation's banks.
The most memorable and most effective boycott was organized by Cardinal Dougherty
of Philadelphia, who forbade that city's
Catholics from watching movies in the city's
movie houses, which at the time were largely
owned by Warner Brothers. His efforts
created a situation in which Warner Brothers
was losing $175,000 a week at the height
of the depression. At a meeting of Hollywood
moguls called to discuss it, the
Philadelphia boycott had reduced the normally
pugnacious Harry Warner, to 'standing up
at the top of the table, shedding tears the size of horse turds, and pleading for someone
to get him off the hook. And well he should, for
you could fire a cannon down the center
aisle of any theater in Philadelphia, without
danger of hitting anyone! And there was
Barney Balaban (of Paramount Theaters),
watching him in terror wondering if he was
going to be next in Chicago.'
The man who described Harry Warner's plight at that meeting and the man who ran the
Production Code office for the next 20 years was a Catholic by the name of Joseph I.
Breen, a man who had no illusions about the
attitudes of the Hollywood elite during the
early '30s:
They are simply a rotten bunch of vile people
with no respect for anything beyond
the making of money. . . . Here [in Hollywood]
we have Paganism rampant and in its
most virulent form. Drunkenness and
debauchery are commonplace. Sexual perversion
is rampant ,. . . any number of our directors and stars are perverts. . . . These Jews
seem to think of nothing but moneymaking and
sexual indulgence. The vilest kind of sin
is a common indulgence hereabouts and the men and women who engage in this sort of
business are the men and women who decide
what the film fare of the nation is to be.
They and they alone make the decision.
Ninety-five percent of these folks are Jews of an
Eastern European lineage. They are, probably,
the scum of the earth (Black, Hollywood
Censored, p. 70).
Virtually all the historians of Breen's tenure as
head of the Production Code condemn
Breen as an anti-Semite. Virtually all of the same historians can only bring themselves to
use the word 'moral' in quotation marks, giving
some indication that they have
internalized the standards of the victors in this
cultural conflict. The fact that Breen went
on to work with 'these folks' for the next 20 years proves ~ to Mark Viera, at least ~ that
Breen was not an anti-Semite:
Joe Breen, who had railed against the
immorality of the Hollywood Jews, had learned
from them, and they from him. They would not
have asked him to run RKO Pictures if he
had been truly anti-Semitic. They would not have flown him here and there. They would
not have invited him into their homes. And they
certainly would not have given him an
Academy Award. He had convictions. He was a
fighter, but he didn't hate.
What was true then is a fortiori true today.
Jews dominate Hollywood and always have.
https://archive.org/stream/TheJewishRevolutionarySpiritAndItsImpactOnWorldHistoryselections_857/jonesRevJujuSelectionsEtc._djvu.txt
"Because Christ sucks" is why Jews are involved in pornography.
https://books.google.com/books?id=xecTAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT95&lpg=PT95&dq=The+only+reason+that+Jews+are+in+pornography+is+that+we+think+that+Christ+sucks&source=bl&ots=jb3Wh4PrJV&sig=b2IlcCtfA0REpRUfC1E4ug3C1lM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi-wcKTtdzWAhVH5GMKHQ9-APoQ6AEIPzAE#v=onepage&q=The%20only%20reason%20that%20Jews%20are%20in%20pornography%20is%20that%20we%20think%20that%20Christ%20sucks&f=false
