Friday, 27 November 2009

Nigel Farage, MEP for the UK Independence Party is an interesting character. At face value he is a man fighting for his country against the leviathan of the European (Soviet) Union. However, when one digs a little below the media-manufactured image, one finds that alike to the 'Great White Hope' Vaclav Klaus (President of the former nation of the Czech Republic), he is a member of Faction Two, which is not an entity which is overly preoccupied with National Freedom.

Vaclav Klaus hoodwinked the people of Europe into a cosy state in which those who could see the evil behind the Lisbon Treaty were dulled into a position of inaction in the belief that the white haired old man would save us in the event of a 'Yes' vote in Ireland. It was believed that the Irish would hold out against the Lisbon Treaty, but if they did not, it didn't really matter, as (Santa) Klaus would refuse to sign the Treaty until the British General Election, after which the incoming Conservative administration would guarantee the British people a referendum, and the Treaty would be killed. The result of this ruse was that aside from Sinn Fein, who fought valiantly for Irish and European Freedom, the Irish 'No' campaign was badly organised. The rest of the nations of Europe left the Irish to fend for themselves, and as such were complicit in their own downfall. Knowing full well that the British would reject the Treaty, the moment the 'Yes' result was achieved, the stooge Klaus, signed it, and it became an irreversible part of European Law, sealing the fate of everyone in new Soviet bloc.


Considering Farage's links to Faction Two, one must have a healthy skepticism when considering whether he is sincere in his desire to restore British independence. Alike to his colleague Klaus, he may be just another puppet taking the spotlight upon himself, in order to draw attention away from the real manoeuvres of the power elite. He has stated that the European Parliament and President Van Rompuy are powerless mouthpieces of the European Commission. This is true. However, he fails to mention that the Commission itself exists as a front for the real rulers of Europe who exercise power through it. This omission is worrisome to say the least.

Regardless of the true agenda of Farage and UKIP, he has made a great many statements which have highlighted the corruption in the European institutions. It could be a case of putting the truth into the public arena in order to gain a mandate for tyranny when there is no serious reaction to the horrors he reveals. be that as it may, this week he has made some very interesting points about the undemocratic nature of the EU.

Focusing upon the former member of the Communist Party of Great Britain, and the Soviet front group CND, now Baroness Ashton, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Farage had the following to say:

(President Van Rompuy is) "at least..an elected politician unlike (Commissioner/Commissar) Baroness Ashton...In some ways she’s ideal isn’t she...She has never had a proper job, and has never been elected to anything in her life, so I guess she’s perfect for this European Union...She married well, she married an advisor and a friend and a supporter of Tony Blair and got put in the House of Lords, when she was put in the House of Lords she was given one big job, and the job was to get the Lisbon Treaty through the House of Lords, and to do so pretending that it was entirely different to the EU Constitution…and she vigorously crushed any attempt in the House of Lords for the British people to have a referendum...she’s not been elected and the people don’t have the power to remove her...Baroness Ashton...has never been elected to public office in her entire life, she takes an enormously powerful job and the peoples of Europe do not have the power to hold her to account and to remove her and that fundamentally is what is wrong with this whole European Union, it’s all about bureaucracy versus democracy.”

Every Word spoken by Farage about Ashton and the other Commissars, sorry Commissioners, is true. It will be interesting to see just how far the EU will go to silence Farage. If he is just playing a role in a carefully choreographed pantomime, then we may expect to see him perform for some time. If, however, he is genuinely fighting against the Globalist agenda, then like the last great British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, who ignored the warnings of the Zionist cabal who needed the British and German Empires to destroy one another, it would come as no surprise should he mysteriously fall ill and be permanently removed from the political arena.

If Farage is anything other than yet another clown in the circus of European politics, then no doubt we can expect to see the internationalist imperialist British Zionist Party, sorry BNP, rolled out to entertain the Euro-sceptic population. This is precisely what they have been groomed to do, and why they have seats in the European Parliament. This is how democracy works, and why no one should have any faith in it.

The USSR didn't bother with a multi-party front behind which the tyrants could have operated without anyone seeing them for the butchers and usurers they are. The new Soviet doesn't need an anti-Soviet mirror as it is but a stage away from going global. The multi-party charade will allow any real dissidents to be identified and neutralised.

This blog post is illegal under the 1999 ruling of the European Court Of Justice (case 274/99), which criminalises criticism of the EU. Legislation has been prepared which will outlaw all parties which are in favour of national independence, justifying this abuse of freedom in true politically correct form as legislation to protect people against Xenophobia. Forget the Party system. That game belongs to the Establishment.

Freedom comes from realising that you don't need Parties and Personalities to fight for you - you just need to stop participating in your own enslavement. Say No to Zionism, to politicians and bureaucrats, and to everyone who wants to restrict your freedom. Your Freedom cannot be taken from you unless you allow it. Don't assist our common enemy. Spread the truth and build the Resistance. Our oppressors are few, and will fail when we accept that we are strong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vBqyG6qYXE&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/user/ukipmeps

Thursday, 26 November 2009

Google apologizes for results of 'Michelle Obama' image search - CNN.com:

For most of the past week, when someone typed "Michelle Obama" in the popular search engine Google, one of the first images that came up was a picture of the American first lady altered to resemble a monkey.

On Wednesday morning, the racially offensive image appeared to have been removed from any Google Image searches for "Michelle Obama."

Google officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

Google faced a firestorm of criticism over the episode. First, it banned the Web site that posted the photo, saying it could spread a malware virus. Then, when the image appeared on another Web site, Google let the photo stand. When a Google image search brought up the photo, an apologetic Google ad occasionally appeared above it.
The Michelle Obama ape photo can be found at FlyStyleLife » WTF IS THIS? MICHELLE OBAMA AS AN APE HUH?

Google: An explanation of our search results:
Sometimes Google search results from the Internet can include disturbing content, even from innocuous queries. We assure you that the views expressed by such sites are not in any way endorsed by Google.

Search engines are a reflection of the content and information that is available on the Internet. A site's ranking in Google's search results relies heavily on computer algorithms using thousands of factors to calculate a page's relevance to a given query.

The beliefs and preferences of those who work at Google, as well as the opinions of the general public, do not determine or impact our search results. Individual citizens and public interest groups do periodically urge us to remove particular links or otherwise adjust search results. Although Google reserves the right to address such requests individually, Google views the integrity of our search results as an extremely important priority. Accordingly, we do not remove a page from our search results simply because its content is unpopular or because we receive complaints concerning it. We will, however, remove pages from our results if we believe the page (or its site) violates our Webmaster Guidelines, if we believe we are required to do so by law, or at the request of the webmaster who is responsible for the page.

We apologize if you've had an upsetting experience using Google. We hope you understand our position regarding offensive results.

Sincerely,
The Google Team
Insincerely, actually. In truth, hit rank for almost every search engine, and certainly for google, is based almost entirely on the popularity of the hit, which in most cases reflects its popularity with the general public. Google is lying to the public even while apologizing to the hypersensitive people offended by popular opinion.

Google returns lots of insulting, defamatory search results. See for example (with SafeSearch off):

george bush
laura bush
bush twins
michele bachmann
ann coulter
glenn beck

Why does google protect Michelle Obama from ridicule? Who else does it protect? Hypersensitive people offended by impious use of the word jew, of course.

Monday, 23 November 2009

I do not normally respond to the accusations of ne'er do wells, axe-grinders and others who enjoy spreading dis-info and making pointless and unworthy accusations. However, since I have changed tactics and begun posting blog articles to a wide variety of fora and social networks, I have become the focus of an orchestrated attack. Rather than answer the accusations individually - which is a massive waste of valuable time and effort, I shall answer the accusations here, and link my response as applicable.

The attacks I have received come in two main strands. Firstly, insinuations about how I earn a living, and secondly outright accusations that I am an advocate of the dissolution of the Church of England, which, it is maintained, is a bad thing. Thirdly, I am accused of anti-Semitism. I will answer these accusations in turn.

Firstly, there is the accusation that what I do for a living impacts upon what I write. Well, obviously, it does. It seems to me that a lot of the people who complain that I do work, are themselves shiftless, and happy to be doley scroungers. These people get their information from the tabloids, and the mainstream media. Other than 'news' from Establishment sources, those who rail against me tend to be Party activists, who receive politically-biased stories from the parties to which they belong. They take the propaganda they absorb at face value and do not question its validity. If the Party says that all the ills of the world are caused by people who eat bread, these activists will take it upon themselves to attack bakeries - whilst munching on a sandwich no doubt. Parties exist to spread propaganda, and if that happens to contain a reasonable degree of truth, then that is a happy coincidence. By using sources which are forbidden by the Party hierarchy, I am seen as a part of the enemy. In truth, by refusing to access all sources, Party activists are denying themselves the ability to see beyond the contrived version of reality the Establishment and the party create for them. They are going into the battle blindfolded - and hate anyone who refuses to cover his or her eyes and dares to search for the truth.

There does seem to be a bizarre train of thought which maintains that people who work can't be trusted. People who undertake menial tasks are seen as a threat, and God forbid anyone tries to climb out of the trap of minimum wage slavery and secure a position where he or she can provide for his or her family! It needs to be understood that by working in jobs which are not run-of-the-mill, people gain access to information which unemployed layabouts and unskilled wage-slaves cannot. I am fortunate in that my job is very interesting, and it does allow me to examine the workings of the State. To a limited degree I am privy to information which the public at large is not - and I use this first hand knowledge against the Establishment itself. We're not going to change a thing by shouting against the system from the outside - we need to get to its very core to do that. I make no apology for working, and for working my way into the beast. Only with knowledge of what 'they' are really doing, can 'they' be stopped

If all those who opposed the system were to get inside it, then it could be dismantled overnight. Attacking it from a position of ignorance, where the only information you have is what they want you to have, is to play a part in their pantomime - and to actively participate in furthering their agenda. This is beyond pointless - it helps reinforce the Establishment. If we are to defeat this monster, we have to know what we are fighting, and how best to go about it. Withdrawing our support by refusing to participate in their games is a key step. The system exists because people prop it up. Removing that prop is an essential part of the struggle.

The most repugnant aspect of the work-related attack upon me is the insinuation that I work for the Security Services, as some sort of 'double agent' - this is sheer lunacy! I am an individual who is aware of what is going on in the world around me, and can see that the traditional methods of opposition are controlled by the very enemy they purport to oppose. Those who cling to the Party System feel threatened by those who have escaped it and can see it for the farce that it always has been and always will be. I have noticed that it is common practice to refer to people who do not fit into the ideological boxes which have been constructed to keep the opposition in line, as State assets, informers, infiltrators etc. certainly such people do exist, and a careful eye must be kept out for them. But attacking anyone who doesn't toe the Party-line is sheer idiocy. Working with people who ideologically (and even personally) hate one another makes sense if the end result is positive for the restoration of freedom. The Establishment has constructed a web to keep us at each others throats. We must stop this childish behaviour and form alliances issue by issue to dismantle our common enemy. Thinking and acting as an individual is dangerous to those who make a living from the Party system, and those cannot see the reality beyond it. It doesn't make one a State plant - the notion is ludicrous and shows a lack of imagination and a degree of paranoia in the accuser.


As to the second accusation - that I oppose the Church of England. in a single word - Yes! I have written in detail about how until the Judaic takeover of Britain facilitated by the Royals, England was the staunchest Catholic nation of them all. Those who defend Judaeo-protestantism are pawns for the Establishment, who are blinded by an irrational hatred which doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Catholicism in its pure form is the strongest defence against Talmudism that Christians have. Ironically, after that there is really only Islam. England would be better off if it converted to Islam than it is being a tool of Protestantism, aka, Pharaseeism. And, I make no apology for that statement either.

Of the religions of Christianity, Islam and (Talmudic) Judaism, the oldest is Christianity. When the Jews broke the covenant by killing Christ, they established a new religion. The Talmud is the Holy book of the Judaic religion and negates everything Christianity stands for. Christianity and Judaism are as different as black is to white. Islam is interesting insofar as it attempts to synthesise elements of pre-Talmudic Judaism with Christianity, but rejects the divinity of Christ. Islam and Christianity differ in that for Muslims Jesus is a Prophet, who was followed by the last Prophet, Mohamed. For Christians, Jesus is the incarnation of God in human form, and His incarnation is the final stage of the development of the faith - Mohamed is not a part of the equation and is in fact an impostor. This is the great division. Both Christians and Muslims reject the Talmud, which is the work of Satan. This is why Judaeo-Christianity is such an abomination.

My objection to the Church of England rests entirely on its negation of Christianity. Anglicanism behaves very much like Talmudic Judaism. Its officials have argued over Biblical text to the point that they have reversed dogma. The Decalogue is infallible, yet only Catholics obey all Ten Commandments. The Church of England makes a virtue out of sin - it approves of abortion (Murder), divorce (Adultery/Dishonouring family), materialism (Covetousness/Theft) etc. It is the very foundation of the Capitalism which has destroyed the Spiritual unity of Europe, and as such is indefensible.

The third accusation is as ridiculous as the others, but needs to be addressed due to the serious legal implications. I state categorically and unequivocally here and now that I am not, never have been, never will be, and do not condone anyone who is, an anti-Semite.

I am opposed to Internationalism in any form which oppresses ordinary people. In its present incarnation the most inhumane form of Internationalism is Zionism. Zionism is an Imperialistic philosophy which has successfully tied itself to an entire people and to a religion. The idea that Zionism equates to Jewishness is an evil and sickening lie. (See http://endwhiteguilt.blogspot.com for examples of Zionist Lies). Zionism is a philosophy. Its adherents come from a variety of faiths and races, which they use to hide their real core unifying faith which is Sabatteanism (Satanism). This spiritual poison has polluted all religions, of which Judaism is but one victim. It has very much become an integral part of the British Establishment and its Church, which is an important reason for exposing Royal Family, the diseased faith of Anglicanism and defending its opponent, Traditional (Pre-Vatican II) Catholicism. Indeed opposition to Zionism is in reality defence of all faiths which reject Satanism.

Racially, many of the key players (such as the Rothschilds) are Ashkenazi - many but not all. Opposition to Zionism does not mean opposition to the Ashkenazim as a people. The shrieking of anti-Semitism at those who discuss the Ashkenazi origins of the Rothschilds and theri partners-in-crime, the British Monarchy, comes from a blurring of the classification of who is racially a Jew. The original Jews of the Old Testament were Semites. The Semites who still practice the Jewish faith are known as the Sephardim. The Ashkenazim, in contrast, are the descendants of the Khazars from Central Asia, who converted en masse at the command of their Monarchy. Claiming the Ashkenazim are Jewish by race is like claiming that all Canadians who practice Islam are Arabs due to Islam originating in Arabia. The Sephardim are routinely persecuted by the Ashkenazi government of Israel. The Palestinians whose land the Rothschilds stole and misnamed Israel practice Sabatteanism behind the mask of Judaism, and are racially Caucasian. They are simply not Jews in faith or by race! The true anti-Semites are the rulers of Israel. If anything, those of us who expose Zionism should be classed as philo-Semites, as we favour a freedom for Palestine and the restoration of Torah Judaism with the eradication of Sabattean Talmudism.

Of interest to British and kindred people, there is as wealth of research which points to the probability of the original Israelites (who were the people of the Old Testament) leaving the region and relocating in Western Europe, especially the British Isles. If this is so, then it is highly likely that a significant proportion of modern Britons are descended from the Abrahamics, and are, at least in part, Semites. (See http://thy-weapon-of-war.blogspot.com/) This further weakens the label of anti-Semitism as that would in part be an attack on my own people. Much to the horror of the Judaeo-Protestants, and Royalist, I am an ardent defender of the true character of my people. This is why those who have swallowed the Establishment propaganda attack me on these grounds. If they would only think for themselves and not allow the Freemasonic Orange Odour, the Satanic Church of England, and the blood lust of Bnai Brit-ish materialist-Zionist-Imperialism, to dictate their thoughts, they would realise they are fighting for their own destruction, and that people such as myself are trying to defend them, even for all the animosity this brings.

I have wasted a lot of time and energy arguing these points with people who refuse to abandon their idols. This article will serve as an answer to those who wish to defame me. we don't have the luxury of time to bicker amongst ourselves. Hopefully those who worship the Monarchy and Anglicanism, and argue that we must defend Israel at all costs, will realise they are worshipping their greatest enemies - before it is too late.

History is a catalogue of wars. In Europe, none was so devastating as the Great War of 1914-18, which differed from those which preceded it insofar as the result was not the transfer of power from one European nation to another, but the diminishing of power for all European nations, including those not actively involved. The Great War saw the dismemberment of many European nations, the merging of others, and the subjugation of many to Zionist control. All these factors contributed to the destabilisation of Europe and set the scene for the next war - which was, of course, the whole idea.

Official historians constantly tell us that the Great War was caused by the shooting of Franz Ferdinand. What they fail to mention is that he was not the only prominent figured to be killed in the run up to the outbreak of war. Europe was twitching with war fever, and had the murder of Ferdinand not been the excuse for the slaughter of the common people (and the financial gain of the Rothschilds et al), another excuse would have been very easily found. The War was a staged event, which sadly saw the real destruction of European civilisation, and the murders by official decree, of millions of people who were used to advance the Globalist agenda.

The only victor in any war is the cabal which funds it. Wall Street financed the Nazis and the Communists, and made a massive profit from the further destruction which followed within three decades of the end of the Great War. The Rothschilds, as financiers to the Globalist elite, have funded every side of every war, since the Napoleonic era. Before that, the Rothschild name may not be found, but the same bloodlines are apparent.

War is a con trick. A very sick and barbaric trick which involves blood sacrifice and theft to transfer power and wealth further away from the people whilst making them feel that the Establishment is acting for them out of duty and kinship. War isn't stupid - War is sick. War for defence is one matter, war for greed is another matter altogether.

Internationalism and capitalism have brought the world to a state where the military is used to advance corporate interests. The Armed Forces are the paid mercenaries of the Rothschilds and their Royal partners-in-crime. This is a very sorry state of affairs. The Zionist Kissinger referred to soldiers as 'stupid beasts' to be used as the political-financial power structure see fit. This is no mere insult; it is actually how they are being used. This makes a mockery of the raison d'etre of the common soldier.

People join the military in order to protect their own people. Certainly some misfits have ulterior motives, but in the main, people join for honourable reasons. They then find themselves being shipped all over the world to fight for big business and the Global super-power which is THE biggest threat to EVERY nation. Soldiers are enforcing embargoes which are starving to death civilians in Iraq (etc), protecting terrorists such as Tony Blair and the Queen, and protecting Opium fields in Afghanistan in order to flood the homeland with poison which kills our people and provides revenue to our enemies - this is not right, and shames all involved.

The military must be brought home. The US Army would be better deployed protecting the border with Mexico, eliminating anyone trying to illegally enter the nation that way - which is a form of invasion, and as such an act of aggression against US soil which merits, nay demands, the most serious consequences. The British Navy should be deployed in our seas sinking ships of immigrants and drug dealers. Likewise, the military forces of Europe should be deployed along the border keeping the Asiatics and Africans out. Transport aeroplanes which are bringing drugs into Europe ad America should be used to get the non-European population out of our homelands and by so doing helping to fight in the War of European Genocide, which has been going on since the 1940s (or earlier), but on OUR side, not on the side of the internationalist enemy which is using them to destroy us!

The military should be used to ensure our borders are secure, and the homogeneity of our people is protected. That is what they are for - to defend our peoples, not to advance multi-culti-rootless cosmopolitanism and the Zionist mafia who are pushing this agenda for their own purposes.

Sunday, 22 November 2009

In the Battle Between Facebook and MySpace, A Digital 'White Flight' | The New York Observer - Berkeley grad student examines online social networks and sees metaphorical "White Flight", which is something bad people do, because integration is what every good person should want.

ADL Special Reports: Rage Grows in America: Anti-Government Conspiracies - The Influence of the Mainstream Media - organized jewry can't stomach even buffoonish deracinated zionist Whites like Glenn Beck. They don't like the philo-semitic Oath Keepers either. It's enraging.

Bashing Palin and the horse she rides in on. Too many Whites scares Chris Matthews - "I think there is a tribal aspect to this thing, in other words, White vs. other people."

Semitic tribal aspects at Princeton. The Death of the Grown-Up | Diana West - "This is how it works: Defy Islamic supremacism and be demonized as a supremacist." Substitute "jewish" for "islamic" and you get... Choosing the chosen people - The Daily Princetonian - a student body that's 13% jewish isn't good enough, it should be 25% jewish like Harvard, Brown, Columbia and Penn. Commenters clash.

A cartoon croons, Not My Waterpark. Tragic comedy, not at all funny.

Thursday, 12 November 2009

Jewish "social critic" James Howard Kunstler has specialized in ridiculing suburbia while paying relatively little attention to the non-White immigration, non-White sociopathy, and forced integration motivating Whites to flock there. The disproportionately jewish race-hustlers, developers, and financiers enriching themselves in the process also get a pass. Kunstler's made a living hyping a variety of threats, like Y2K and depleted uranium, and warning most recently that "peak oil" will cause a "long emergency". The effect, if not intent, has been to direct attention away from the more immediate and more substantial problems for more Americans, especially White Americans - the displacement and dispossession caused by genocidal levels of immigration and systemic financial fraud, each fueling the other.

Lately Kunstler has been keeping a nervous eye on a particular facet of the fraud. In Thinking the Unthinkable he writes:

How bad is the situation 'out there' really? In my view, things are veering toward such extreme desperation that the US government might fall under the sway, by extra-electoral means, of an ambitious military officer, or a group of such, sometime in the near future. I'm not promoting a coup d'etat, you understand, but I am raising it as a realistic possibility as elected officials prove utterly unwilling to cope with a mounting crisis of capital and resources. The 'corn-pone Hitler' scenario is still another possibility - Glen Beck and Sarah Palin vying for the hearts and minds of the morons who want 'to keep gubmint out of Medicare!' - but I suspect that there is a growing cadre of concerned officers around the Pentagon who will not brook that fucking nonsense for a Crystal City minute and, what's more, would be very impatient to begin correcting the many fiascos currently blowing the nation apart from within. Remember, today's US military elite is battle-hardened after eight years of war in Asia. No doubt they love their country, as Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte loved theirs. It may pain them to stand by and watch it dissolve like a castle made of sugar in a winter gale.
I do believe it might pain Kunstler to watch israel dissolve. It certainly doesn't pain him to watch and snark at "the morons" while it happens to America. Does he think what Goldman Sachs and friends have been doing is unethical, unfair, unjust, immoral, illegal, indefensible, or just plain slimy? Maybe. But for sure he's concerned how the rubes will react when they find out. He's afraid it might be bad for jews. And he thinks that's unthinkable.

This isn't the first time Kunstler has expressed such fears. Hunter Wallace (formerly Prozium) wrote about Kunstler in Cornpone Nazism toward the end of July, linking to a Kunstler essay titled Evil Syndicated. I'll excerpt a few bits to illustrate how Kunstler recognizes Goldman is creating a problem, but that the real problem is the potential backlash.
By now, everyone in that fraction of the world that pays attention to something other than American Idol and their platter of TGI Friday's loaded potato skins knows that Goldman Sachs has been caught at another racket in the stock market: front-running trades. What a clever gambit, done with the help of the markets themselves - the Nasdaq in particular - in which information on trades is held back a fraction of a second from public view, while the data is shoveled to the computers of privileged subscribers who can execute zillions of programmed micro-trades before the rest of the herd makes a move. This allows them to vacuum up hundreds of millions of dollars by doing absolutely nothing of value.
Don't mistake Kunstler's accurate description here for disapproval. If anything he sees it as a "clever" way to shear "the herd".
In any sensible society - i.e. a society with an instinct for self-preservation - it would be against the law and the people doing it would be sent to prison.
Maybe the larger question is: since when did we become a society lacking the instinct for self-preservation - that is, a society bent on suicide?
Yes, a sensible society would have stopped Madoff and Hasan too. Whites have an instinct for self-preservation. We express it all the time, even though doing so has long been pathologized and is becoming increasingly criminalized. Since when? It's been getting worse ever since jewish emancipation. The proper word for what's happening, by the way, is genocide, not suicide. It's done over our objections. Jews like Kunstler aid and abet the crime by hyping symptoms rather than causes, and misdirecting blame. They see "anti-semitism" everywhere because they're not suicidal.

I think the larger question for Kunstler is: what's best for jews? The larger question for me is: when will Whites take note of this jewish obsession with themselves and their own interests? And when will we see through the dissembling of jewish "social critics" who ridicule and pathologize everything we do to resist what they misrepresent as "suicide"?
As we turn the corner toward autumn, President Obama looks increasingly like a dupe, a tool, or a co-conspirator of Goldman Sachs.
What bothers me is that, sooner or later, the conduct of Goldman Sachs will lead the growing ranks of the unemployed, foreclosed, disentitled, and hopeless into the hands of a savage right wing seeking mindless vengeance, for instance, against "the Jews," (as represented by Goldman Sachs), or brown-skinned people (as embodied by a vilified president).
"It's that brown-skinned guy's fault! Blame him!"

What bothers me is that Kunstler is saying that blaming the group who is responsible is "mindless", because he's acutely mindful that it might be bad for "the jews" and "brown-skinned people". Note however that even as Kunstler does this he feels perfectly free casting aspersions on Whites (as represented by "the savage right wing"), and white-skinned people (as embodied by the "evil syndicated"/"cornpone nazis"). What we have here is a conflict of group interests. Rather than addressing it honestly Kunstler tries to obscure and caricaturize it, advising those who already have their hands on "the growing ranks of the unemployed, foreclosed, disentitled, and hopeless" how to best manipulate them.
Readers of this blog know I'm allergic to conspiracy theories. But surveying the scene out there, it is hard to not conclude that Goldman Sachs has become the "front-runner" of a criminal syndicate defrauding US taxpayers.
Kunstler knows it's hard because he's tried. Now he's trying something more familiar and easier: scapegoating Whites.
In the meantime, the US economy gives the illusion of recovery - but to what? Back to a "consumer" credit card shopping orgy? Another house-buying fiesta?
There you go. One last kick in the nuts for the evil morons. Pay no mind to the hedge fund managers who might be called to account for ripping off the evil morons, if only in Kunstler's nightmares.

Kunstler's not the only "social critic" who's thinks it's important to suppress/redirect the backlash.

Oy! Noam Chomsky Compares Right-Wing Media To “Nazis”:
The memory that comes to my mind — I don’t want to press the analogy too hard, but I think it’s worth thinking about — is late Weimar Germany. There were people with real grievances, and the Nazis gave them an answer. ‘It’s the fault of the Jews and the Bolsheviks and we’ve got to protect ourselves from them, and that will take care of them.’ And you know what happened…

[...]Germany in the 1920s was at the peak of Western civilization. A decade later, it was at the pits of human history.
Chomsky's characterization of those two decades is from a jewish point of view, which is likely the opposite of how a contemporary native German would have described them.
Unless an answer can be given to these people, unless they can be led to understand what’s really happening to them, we could be in for trouble.
"We" could be in for trouble? Me and mine are already in trouble. We are ruled by a corrupt and illegitimate regime whose highest priority is to drown us in "people of color", each and every one of which is afforded special rights over Whites. To even question this is considered a crime. Why should we care about the trouble the fraudsters and the "social critics" spinning excuses for them might suffer? They don't care about our troubles.

Wednesday, 11 November 2009

The plan for Global Government is not new. In one form or another it is a plan which has been around since not long after the last Global Government dissolved in the time before officially recorded and acknowledged history. For people living since that time, it has either been a utopian dream or a dystopian nightmare. Until now it has never felt like anything but a fantasy. Now it is only a very short time from becoming reality.

The proof of the imminence of the Global State is all around for everyone to see. It is testament to the power of those who control the media that through their mendacious technology they are able to at once announce their agenda, and at the same time convince people that there is no agenda, and that only lunatic 'conspiracy theorists' would believe there is one.

The influence of the media can be experienced in everyday conversation; such as the statements "we won the game/war/election" spoken by people who may be spectators of the media show, but not direct participants. Many people who have seen through the lie of democracy and know that neither the Party of Government nor the Party of Opposition can be trusted, still believe that change can come through elections! They see that Parliamentary Democracy is a sham, but are so conditioned that they cannot grasp that it isn't a simple case of the main parties being corrupt, but rather it is a fact that the system itself is so constructed as to corrupt everyone who participates in any effective manner. How so? By making effective participation possible only for those who have been compromised and accepted the geld of the Zionist mafia.

In recent times Nationalists across Europe have won many seats in the European Parliament. At the same time, the Lisbon Treaty has passed and the Copenhagen Treaty which will seal the fate of all of us will be in force by 2010 (weeks away). The Nationalists who have done well have included parties such as the British National Party which has become avowedly Zionist - making British insofar as it supports the Establishment, and Nationalist in no way at all. The UK Independence Party is likewise controlled by the Internationalist Zionist Faction Two. Parties which genuinely oppose European Union, and World Union have failed to achieve any relevant representation in Britain, if not in all Europe. The Great White Hope Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic has likewise proven himself a tool of the elite by allowing all opposition focus on himself, preventing a media-hypnotised population from acting for themselves until too late - when he simply 'gave up' the fight at precisely the moment his masters willed.

There are people who are awake to the futility of the party system who seek alternative means to halt the march to the Global Gulag. The Establishment has an answer to such people - just as it neatly fits people into nonsensical divisions of left and right, then uses the people who accept these labels to attack each other, it uses the same people to attack those who won't take any labels. The left-right division is a Masonic creation. It keeps natural allies apart on superficial grounds. People who won't play the game are a bigger threat to the Establishment than those who take their places like good little pawns in the grand chess game.


In the British Isles we have many political movements. Those who take the Masonic label of being 'left-wing' attack anyone who takes the label 'right-wing' - sometimes verbally, sometimes physically. The same applies in the other direction. The Establishment create these divisions in order to prevent a viable opposition forming. Globalism reduces everyone to the position of materialistic slaves, regardless of nationality, race, religion, sex, or whatever. the common enemy is Globalism, and its drive to turn every town in every country into a faceless characterless, cultural vacuum. They are succeeding because people who oppose this spend more time fighting one another than fighting the Global menace.


An example of the futility of the Party game is the meandering of activists from one Party to another. In the Nationalist arena, we are witnessing the BNP becoming ever more internationalist and Zionist, with the members who oppose this moving to other parties, such as the National Front. This is really a pointless exercise. With the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, parties such as the NF are redundant, and when the laws against Xenophobia are passed, they will be outlawed. All they serve to do is to contain the opposition by recycling activists from one group to another. The same applies to the 'Left'. The difference is that there is some unity amongst the 'Left' at least on the single issue of opposing Nationalists. That is about as far as the unity goes though.

Parties are not entirely pointless. They are reservoirs of activists, and as such, are home to people with a passion to put right the ills in society. Sadly this passion, rather than being nurtured, is stifled by the leadership. The priority of Party leaders is to win seats in elections. to do this, the policies must change to suit the media-driven political climate. This requires a succession of compromises, twists and turns, which will reduce any party to being a mirror image of the governing party it seeks to oust. Parties which retain ideological purity fail. Individuals within parties who refuse to adopt every policy change are removed. If the goal is to win elections at any cost, then yes, parties can do this. If the goal is to halt the Globalist Zionist destruction of our world, then by their very design, they must fail.

If political parties are such a waste of time, effort, and resources, then what can be done to halt our decline, and our enemies' advances? Of prime importance is to stop playing games we cannot win. The Party System is such a game. Winning elections does not produce power, elections are only won by those who have power - or to be more accurate by those who do the bidding of the real power which controls all elections. the only instances when the democratic process is worth joining is at the parish level. Parish Councils very often are undermanned, and all it takes to get on a council is to put your name forward. If you are unopposed, the seat is yours. Party affiliation will provoke interest and possibly opposition. standing as an independent individual avoids this - and allows the individual to speak freely.

What we must do is stop attacking one another. There are Police Informers and agents provocateur placed in all organisations. Whereas it is important to expose the shills, it is vital to not become paranoid and point the finger of accusation at anyone who has opinions which differ from one's own. Likewise the Left-Right nonsense must be dropped. There are good Nationalists who oppose internationalism due to love of their nation, not hatred of others; there are good Socialists who oppose materialism through an appreciation of the value of humanity over commerce; similarly many Anarchists take their opposition to Government from an awareness of the corruption inherent in the system, and the propensity of Government of any hue to oppress and manipulate the people. Refusing to cooperate with one another by compartmentalising our beliefs and the beliefs of others, is exactly what the Establishment need us to do. We do not have to agree on everything. Our common opposition to the Internationalist menace is reason enough to cooperate. The Zionist cabal is destroying the only world we have, and fighting amongst ourselves only helps them. United we are strong, divided, our efforts are pointless.

All that can be achieved by fighting for ideological purity is to ghettoise ourselves. We will achieve the purity we seek at the expense of losing any hope of protecting the ones we love from the Global Prison being built around us. Our children will have no future other than as slaves to materialism and cannon fodder for commerce. Whatever '-ism' we attach to ourselves, we will still be crushed under the heel of the Global Jackboot. Fighting silly street battles and Internet wars will do none of us any good. We need to unite if only to stop the completion of the Internationalist Empire. After that we may fight against one another again, if we still haven't learnt the value of understanding and appreciating our individual strength and worth.

In practical terms we must take the fight to where it matters - to everywhere we can. We must speak to everyone of every political hue. We must agitate on every forum, every social network, in every workplace, and every interaction. We are losing this fight because we are acting as players in a pantomime not or our making. We need to exit the stage and take over the reality beyond the theatre. And we need to do this now. 'Tomorrow' will be too late.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
 

FREE HOT VIDEO | HOT GIRL GALERRY