Crypto Jews, Fake Photos and Spooks

[Miles Mathis, “Where is the hand holding up his head? The cuff is empty! That head is pasted on.”]

Wartime Saigon had a notoriously eccentric poet, Bùi Giáng. He was 48 years old when Communist tanks shook the ground. Barely eating, Bùi Giáng would live 23 more years before dying at Chợ Rẫy Hospital in 1998. In the early 90’s, poet Nguyễn Quốc Chánh saw him lying at a café’s entrance for an hour. He said nothing and no one bothered him. Since it was a time of fear and privation, everyone had his own slipping sanity to worry about.

There’s a hilarious Bùi Giáng tale. Seeing a Russian woman on the street, he grabbed her breast, so was arrested. At the police station, a cop said, “Why did you do something so outrageous?!”

“I just wanted to see how big Russian tits were, since they’re still feeding us after all these years.”

By the time I heard it, that story’s been finessed, tweaked or embellished six million times. Although it almost certainly didn’t happen, there’s no proof either way. If there’s a photo, the grab breast faithfuls would have a stronger argument, but photos can be doctored. With Photoshop and, now, AI image generators, just about anything can be shown. Although photos can be proven to have been staged, almost no one look or think very carefully. They simply go with the official caption. If “cat” is appended to a dog image, they’ll accept that some cats are indistinguishable from dogs. In the USA, many bearded men are definitely women. Only conspiracy theorists trust their eyes, experience or common sense.

No one is so relentless at dissecting supposedly fake photos as Miles Mathis. In an article on Joseph Stalin, Mathis scrutinizes 28 images. Twenty-two are of Stalin, often with others. Quite convincingly, Mathis proves that most if not all have been tampered with beyond retouching, but what’s his point? Even Mathis’ claim that Stalin was Jewish, true or not, distracts from this observation in his penultimate paragraph:

Germany had plundered the rest of Europe, Stalin had plundered Russia, and Churchill and Roosevelt could now come in and plunder Germany, at the behest of their trillionaire masters. 90% of Europe had just been plundered by the bankers and other industrialists, with a manufactured war as the excuse. As the cherry on top, the Jewish plunderers created themselves as the primary victims.

Jews had Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin destroy Germany while depicting themselves as Germany’s and WWII’s primary victims. Eighty years later, they’re still milking that half dead cow. Is that at least somewhat truthful? Shouldn’t we have a civil discussion about it?

At the beginning of that 9,576 word article, Mathis writes, “We will start with the name itself. Joseph Stalin. It isn’t his real name, of course. It is a code name, and they admit that. It means ‘Man of Steel’. No, really. You will say, ‘like Superman?’ Yep. Already you can see the level of the hoaxers here. This whole story is about as believable as that of Beaver Cleaver, and just as clever.”

Ho Chi Minh, too, is not his real name. That doesn’t mean Uncle Ho was a crypto Jew. Mathis’ characterization of Stalin as a “code name” also distracts. Kings, warlords, bandits, professional wrestlers and even pussified poets have given themselves awesome nicknames. Richard the Lionheart, Earth Shaker, Vlad the Impaler, the Executioner, Beast from the East, Jack Swagger… Undoubtedly inspired by Brian Bosworth, a young Dickens called himself The Inimitable Boz. Dickens dropped it, I hear, after seeing Bo Jackson knock The Boz into Puget Sound on Monday Night Football. They never found that trash talking Okie’s body.

I’m thinking about Miles Mathis because of his bareknuckle fight with Ron Unz. Never judge the Silicon Valley Mo’ Money Man by his photos! Unz swings harder than a drunk Tex Cobb just before last call! Unz’s entire weight is behind every wide left hook, “Within ten or twenty minutes of looking over his articles, I concluded that they all seemed like total rubbish, but of a rather suspicious type.” “Miles Mathis is notorious for promoting total nonsense, so much so that I very strongly suspect he’s a disinfo operative.” “Mathis’ work seems aimed at particularly stupid, crazy, or gullible individuals, of whom the ‘conspiracy community’ has more than its fair share.”

The Mathis style of analysis is an “illogical process usually obfuscated by an enormous wave of meandering, confusing, and mostly irrelevant verbiage, much like the patter of a card-sharp distracting the mark in a game of Three-Card Monte.” Commenters who cited Mathis “seemed to be the most stupid and gullible ones.”

Here, though, Unz clearly buckles Mathis. To Mathis’ claim David Irving is actually Jewish, Unz counters, “In one of his public lectures, Irving mentioned that when he had finished his landmark Hitler biography, produced at the peak of his public success, his very nervous publisher asked him whether he might be Jewish, hoping for the positive answer that would minimize the feared backlash, but Irving replied that unfortunately he wasn’t. On several other occasions, Irving has explained that given his historical focus, his career would have been much less difficult if his name had been “Irving David” rather than the other way round. So considering Irving’s enormous professional travails over the decades, I can’t understand why he would have ever concealed the fact of his Jewish ancestry if it were true.”

Unz’ 5,550-word take down of Mathis is titled, “The Fake World of Miles Matthis.” This “very brief overview [was] based upon the couple of days [Unz] spent casually exploring [Mathis’] archive.” Few can snark like Jews, I must say. It’s often counterproductive.

When Muslim Kevin Barrett praises Unz, “Thanks for the spot-on evaluation of Mathis,” Jonathan Revusky flickers this jab, “Kevin, aren’t you going beyond the call of duty in praising Ron’s latest article?”

Many people have cringed at Barrett’s hearty embrace of Unz’s views, including his militant stance against “antivaxxers.” On 5/6/23, I wrote, “If Barrett isn’t careful, he will go down as Chomsky with Ron Unz as Epstein. Kevin, don’t let anyone sneer, ‘How much did Ron pay you?’”

Answering Revusky, Barrett backs down a bit, “Maybe I am too quick to judge, but everything I have ever read by ‘Mathis’ has immediately struck me as utterly moronic in its use of (hilariously inept) language and (utterly deranged) reasoning and (complete lack of) sourcing.”

Is everything by Mathis “utterly moronic” in “hilariously inept language” with “utterly deranged reasoning”? It’s impossible to be more worthless. Unlike Unz, I’ve spent more than a couple days casually skimming Mathis. Let’s break down this passage:

Henry Steel Olcott was a high-ranking officer in military intelligence, and he co-founded Theosophy with Blavatsky. Both Olcott and Whitman worked for New York newspapers in the 1840’s. Whitman is said to have founded and/or edited several. Olcott was in the War Department at the same time Whitman was working for the US Attorney General (1860’s). Do you suppose it was just a coincidence that both of them were importing a watered-down and corrupted form of Buddhism in the same decades?

That’s from Mathis’ “outing” of Whitman. To link Olcott with Whitman, Mathis says they both worked for New York newspapers in the same decade! Later in the 1860’s, they were employed by the DC government, and they both pushed “a watered-down and corrupted form of Buddhism.” To be contemporary journalists in America’s biggest city, or any city, for that matter, means absolutely nothing. Plus, Whitman had a long record as a newspaperman, and a very good one. In DC, they worked in different branches of a huge bureaucracy, enlarged further by the war. Whitman on that carnage:

O God! that whole damned war business is about nine hundred and ninety nine parts diarrhea to one part glory: the people who like the wars should be compelled to fight the wars: they are hellish business, wars—all wars: Sherman said, War is hell: so it is: any honest man says so—hates war, fighting, bloodletting.

Is that just a smokescreen? Mathis thinks Whitman was just a “fake poet” promoted by war profiteers. Like London, Pound, Joyce, Hemingway, Dickens and even Shakespeare, Whitman as an icon was created by insidious, hidden forces, what we now call “the deep state.”

According to Mathis, nearly every modern painter or writer is a fraud. As a realist painter, Mathis sees himself going against the grain. At his website, Mathis recommends Aaron Weisenfeld, Jacob Collins, Marc Dalessio, Jeremy Lipking and Yuqi Wang.

Wiesenfeld is just kitsch, while none of the others is noteworthy as a realist. Realist painting wasn’t torpedoed by intelligence agencies, but transformed by photography. Its invention forced painters to do more than to render anything realistic. That’s why we’ve had Impressionism, Post Impressionism, Fauvism and Expressionism, etc. The Pre-Raphaelites were the first reaction to the camera. Since their canvases were dreamy or fantastic, they were only superficially realistic. They, too, had to distort what could be seen. Too stark and with details deleted, Photorealism is also not realistic. There are many important realist painters after the camera’s appearance. Think Edward Hopper, Balthus, Lucian Freud, the American Regionalists and those in the Ashcan School. Just in Philly, the Academy of Fine Arts has produced at least a dozen interesting realists.

Though he gives the appearance of knowing just about everything, Mathis’ citations of inferior painters is really cute, I must say. If he’s a Mossad creation, as Mossad or CIA funded Unz claims, it’s just another Jewish joke, though more subtle than usual.

Whatever he is, Mathis can’t be dismissed as “utterly moronic.” His 8,020-word screed against Whitman contains many thought provoking observations. One passage, “While Thoreau talked about specific political causes and specific remedies, actually spending time in jail for them, we can’t imagine Whitman doing the same. Thoreau saw problems he wanted to solve. For him, America wasn’t just a big colorful parade. But Whitman sees everything through the eyes of the salesman. Leaves of Grass looks like it was written from the Chamber of Commerce offices, not from the shore of some lonely lake. Leaves of Grass doesn’t trumpet individualism, it reeks of town-hall boosterism.”

I’ve interpreted this “boosterism” entirely differently. On 6/7/12, I wrote, “Egypt left us the pyramids, and the Cambodian Empire, Angkor, but I will insist that the most lasting American monument to world civilization is a book of poems, Leaves of Grass. America is more ideal than fact, and no one has articulated this mirage or aspiration better than Walt Whitman. Centuries from now, when our skyscrapers are but giant decaying teeth, Whitman’s ecstatic hallucination will be remembered as the embodiment of an America that seemingly might have been.”

Interviewed by the University of Porto on 9/17/23, I said, “Whitman’s I was more virile and voracious than the actual man, but he wasn’t boasting. America’s greatest poet created a vast I to draw us timid souls into this unspeakably fantastic world, and not as hedonists, I don’t think, but worshipers. Like us, Whitman mostly just ogled, but at least he wasn’t staring at screens. We are beyond miserable. Like a camera, Whitman was a promiscuous voyeur.”

Not that long ago people could disagree, in private or public, while still sharing booze and laughs. “Six or seven years ago,” Unz had spent just “ten or twenty minutes” at Mathis’ website, yet this was enough for Unz to establish “a firm rule that any comment mentioning, citing, or linking Miles Mathis or his work was automatically trashed, about the only such blanket prohibition I have ever imposed on our very lightly moderated website.”

A headline like this, though, is ultra kosher, “Antisemitic Protesters Swarm New York Stock Exchange, Brutal Badge Niggers Arrest Over 200.” Or this comment:

If you’re a fucking dyke that’s your problem. I’m a heterosexual White American male that has lived in South East Asia for some 20 years. For those that don’t know (you for example) I have probably had more pussy than most rock stars. Ask any man that has been to that part of the World what the pussy situation is and he will tell you. Some old bag such as yourself has not the slightest conception. When I was living in the Philippines I was turning down eights so I would have more time to fuck nines. My personal best was 4 girls in one 24 hour period. And that was done without setting out to do so. It just happened that way. It was not uncommon for me to do them two at a time and occasionally 3 at a time. I would just go down the line and the lucky girl ( or the unlucky girl, as the case may be) would catch the load. I never went past 3 girls at one time because I didn’t want to be excessive. 18 to 23 was my favored hunting range. The oldest girl I have ever fucked in my life was 27. And I felt like I should drop her off at the rest home after I was done with her. I would love to have an accurate accounting of how many women I have had. I have only the roughest approximation. Let me put it this way. If blow jobs don’t count I have probably had somewhere between 500 to 700 women. If blow jobs count I have easily had 1000 plus. I would have higher numbers that that but I lived with several girls, one for about 4 years and another for about 3. That cut down on my numbers a bit since I was trying to be faithful. The last girl I lived with was 18 while I was 49. And she was literally a beauty queen. Number one in her (high) school. And I know that chaps your old dry ass.

Despite his meandering or even nonsense, Mathis never soaks you in savagery.

With any writer, you take what’s useful, and leave the rest. Despite the wild speculations in Mathis’ article on the assassinations of JFK and RFK, his analysis of historical photos should force us to reexamine, again, what happened. His puncturing of the byzantine Dylan myth is excellent.

Of RFK lying on the ground, Mathis asked where’s the blood? As for the missing hand holding up the dying man’s head, it’s probably attached to a matchstick wrist. Not everything is a conspiracy.

Not all photos are fake. None of mine is. Sometimes, I even back up my spontaneous babble with a candid video. Its very shittiness is proof of my artlessness. Check out my on-the-ground observations of Moscow, Russian women and Vietnamese swarming all over that capital. “Go back to where you came from!” I felt like screaming.

[Miles Mathis, “Again, the first thing I noticed was the ridiculous fake Kennedy, with no head wound. So I looked closely at the car. The car doesn’t match” with a famous photo, shown below]

[Robert Capa’s fake photo, “The Fallen Soldier,” 1936]

[Alexander Gardner’s Civil War photo with corpses rearranged, 1862]