Saturday, 30 April 2016

Mr. Champagne Socialist

In common with most European countries Ireland has - thankfully - begun taking a tougher approach to the "asylum seekers" flooding the Continent like a plague of locusts. Rumour has it that the Irish Naval Service would no longer act as an unpaid shuttle service between Africa and Italy, instead becoming much more selective. Gratified by this I was nonetheless disturbed to learn from Parliamentarian Mick Wallace how things were actually starting to play out down there.

"We're literally killing them! Actually drowning them" he raged as he returned from the scene of a tragedy, eventually dissolving into tears at his country's shame. I had to admit that I also felt a pang of guilt at the thought of our sailors holding the heads of hapless migrants under the Mediterranean waves while machine-gunning the survivors, cackling maniacally as they did so.

But not for the first time Mick was engaging in a bit of hyperbole. In fact make that grotesque misrepresentation. Let me explain. He visited Calais where he met - wait for it - an unfortunate boy whose whole family died horribly. So he was now alone in the world, just waiting to reach safety in Ireland. Actually I think I've heard from this guy before now. About a thousand times in fact.

And how was Ireland 'actually killing them'? Well it seems the fact that Ireland isn't accepting this poor orphan (and everyone else who feels like roosting here) means that we're 'actually killing them'. Yeah, Mick, right. Someone said that if you can fake sincerity you got it made. Well if that's true Mick does not have it made because his performance brought down a tirade of abuse and ridicule on his head (on which he wears a dead ostrich, as you can see from the pic).

This guy is the quintessential champagne socialist SJW. Although making millions from property development during the boom he nonetheless held his street cred, at least with the chattering classes, by espousing fashionable causes that cost him nothing. ('Paging Bono, paging Bono'). Always while the cameras were rolling of course. Things like refusing to eat Israeli or South African oranges, chaining himself to bankers' cars, getting arrested for protesting American military  landings at Shannon.

Although an avowed anti-capitalist this horny-handed son of the soil was quick to avail of bankruptcy laws when his firm went down the tube, adroitly switching ownership of assets, leaving the taxman, creditors and his workers in the lurch before heading off to Italy to inspect his vineyards there. Another passion of his is Ireland's homeless. Whose numbers would be tripled were his proposals to let everyone from the Third World settle here.

But with the 'liberal' Left what you say matters more than what  you do. Which is another way of saying the lot of them are two-faced hypocrites. 

Wednesday, 27 April 2016

Comment from a South African Jewish reader

A reader from South Africa has written a comment (at the end of this thread) The following is an excerpt:

I have lived in South Africa for 68 years, I am Jewish but unfortunately I or any of my friends did not manage to own any gold or diamond mines. Quite a few of them however did start businesses which succeeded in employing many white and black south africans, affording them the opportunity of educating their children as well as putting food on the table.

It's amazing how today as in the past, any problem which arises finishes up being the fault of the Jews. We must surely be the "chosen people", chosen to be blamed, chosen to be killed, chosen to be chased out of any place they might make their home.Of course there were people like Slovo, Kasrils, Goldreich etc. who supported the abolishment of apartheid but were outnumbered by the jews who were not involved and just wanted to be left alone in the status quo unfortunately. Their thinking being that whatever happens we'll be blamed as seems to be the case now. The majority voted against the National party although there were a few who did.

Here let me expand on my response to his comment. First I know and have always acknowledged that not all Jews are engaged in the war against White civilisation. In fact maybe it's only a minority amongst them.  However, Jews are overwhelmingly over-represented in every movement working towards this end. Briefly I'm referring to feminism, cultural relativism, bogus equality theories, affirmative action, open borders (for White countries only) the degradation of art and entertainment. And here's another point. They are overwhelmingly under-represented among those of us fighting back.  

Specifically in regards to South Africa...while spending two semesters in SA (at Wits and UCT) in 1994 and 1995 I got to know at least ten Jews. Looking back I think that not one of them was enthusiastic or hopeful about the emerging Rainbow Nation. Yet the masterminds and controllers of the ANC-lead war against White South Africa were Jewish. Just as with the NAACP in America this 'black' organisation was in reality a Jewish operation with a few token melanin-enhanced faces shoved up front for the optics. It was founded by KGB agent Ruth First (wife of Joe Slovo), Dennis Goldberg, Lionel Bernstein, Arthur Goldreich and Bob Hepple. Jews have more control over the banking system now - both the Central Bank and the commercial banks - than they did under White rule, and several Jews are or have been in the Cabinet, three of them sit on the Supreme Court and they headed up the police and railway services. All despite representing a minuscule proportion of the population. 

In summary Jews - or at east the elite Jews - have precipitated the fall of White South Africa and have profited greatly from that fall.

So dear reader/commentator, what can we make of this? My proposal is the same as that recommended in an earlier post. 'You might as well give up trying to bamboozle those whites who already understand the nature of the Jewish attack on our people. That game is up, the evidence is overwhelming, and awareness is only going to grow from here. The horse is already out of the barn. The Jews had a good thing going, but as usual allowed their hatred and arrogance to get the better of them.
However, what you can do, if you are Jewish and if you are actually sincere, is work within the Jewish community to call off the dogs. You can work with them in a way that we can’t. Next time you are tempted to chastise the goyim, chastise your own instead. Persuade THEM, those who are doing harm, as opposed to US, who are simply pointing out the reality of the situation in a bid to salvage what we can out of the increasing wreckage of our own tribe.' 

So thanks for your comment my friend. I accept your sincerity and wish you well. And hopefully you'll give my words some consideration.

Sunday, 24 April 2016

A grave warning from Dr. Paul Ehrlich

I see Fidel Castro look-alike Paul Ehlich continues to dish out advice even as he approaches his eightieth year.  He sternly warns of Global Warming. It seems that within a decade or two England will be a desert, while tourists will bask on the beaches of Svalbard, beneath whispering palms, bathed in a sub-tropical sirocco breeze. And based on this advice I immediately placed my order for a warm house in the middle of the Sahara. Because when Paul advises shrewd investors act.

And do the polar (heh!) opposite.

You see the good doctor's prognostications have up to now been, well, mixed. In fact make that utterly, totally and hilariously wrong. To wit in 1970 (The Population Bomb) he warned of imminent world-wide mass starvation, that England would cease to exist as a country by the end of the 20th century as famine stalked the land. In 1974 he predicted a new Ice Age as being just around the corner. Then, without  skipping a beat changed his mind and said well no, actually I mean Global Warming is going to finish us off.  And soon.

Ehrlich is far from being alone. The Inconvenient Truth about Al Gore is that in 2006 he told us that we'd all be living "in a frying pan" within ten years. How did that work out Al? In 1970 Dr. George Wald of Harvard was awarded the Nobel Prize for warning us that "civilization will end within 10 to 15 years" short of taking dramatic and unprecedented measures. Which of course never were taken. There are dozens of other hucksters out there now peddling similar nostrums, this time based on the Global Warming wheeze.

Serious question: How do these guys get away with being totally wrong again and again? More pertinently how do they continue to get away with it?  It's complex, so maybe we need one of those brilliant black doctors and scientists we see on TV to explain it to us? Either way, my own theory is that the GW hoax represents a perfect vehicle for propagating the globalist/NWO agenda. Listen to uber-bitch Mary Robinson on the New York Slimes  "we need to secure an international legally binding climate agreement because climate change cannot be solved at the national level alone."

Am I right?

Thursday, 21 April 2016

Throwing the Saudis under the bus

What's behind the sudden outburst of American hostility to the bloated perverts of Saudi Arabia? I'm referring narrowly here to the sudden interest in the 'missing 28 pages' of the 9/11 Omission (sic) Report that allegedly tie that hell-hole to the 9/11 attacks. Why the sudden interest? There's even a Bill going through Congress to support their disclosure, jointly sponsored by legendary dual-citizen Chucky Schumer. After all they've been known about for more than ten years.  And now, right on cue, the FBI reveal the dramatic discovery of a buried cache of documents which directly ties the Saudis to the attack. I also notice that the media shills on CNN and Fox are rowing in behind the new-found demonising.

The questions come thick and fast.

Is it to deflect interest away from the real perps?

But if so, why now, just when it seems the whole thing is slipping into the memory hole like the USS Liberty attack?

Surely if the Saudis get flung under the bus they're going to identify the rest of the criminals before they go? Or will they take one for the team in return for a safe and luxurious hideaway filled with pretty young White boys?

What will be the impact on the recent farcical US Court ruling which blamed Iran for the attacks and thus liable for $ billions in compensation?

Questions, questions, questions...and I really don't know the answer to any of them. What I do know is that when it all pans out the Israelis will once again bring Iago to mind: "Now whether he kills Cassio or Cassio him, or each kill the other, every way makes my gain".

Anyway, in response I'm sure most Americans will want to know what Kim Kardashian thinks about it....

Tuesday, 19 April 2016

Some people in Ireland really do benefit from diversity

As you've probably discerned, I'm not a great fan of diversity despite being constantly assured of its endless benefits. Mind you for some strange reason those benefits are never actually spelled out in any detail. Which is leading an increasing number of people to wonder whether anyone actually does benefit. In fact I can assure the doubters that many indeed do. Specifically those engaged in the law, prison and immigration industries.

This from the Irish Independent:

"A man who took part in imprisoning, stripping and beating Innocent Wilson because he wanted to teach him a moral lesson for entering his girlfriend's bedroom has been jailed for six months. In Dublin Circuit Criminal Court Judge Sarah Berkeley sentenced Lucky Shaka (24) to two years' imprisonment, but suspended the final 18 months."

I can just imagine the scene in court

State Prosecutor: 'Mr. Shaka, you are facing serious charges. Are you innocent or not?'

Shaka 'No, I not Innocent, I Lucky'. Pointing at Wilson 'He Innocent'

State Prosecutor: 'So you are not innocent?'

Shaka: 'No, I not Innocent'

State Prosecutor: 'Judge, I rest my case'

And then there's the case of the Nigerian employed by an Irish hotel as a Food and Beverage Manager - 'in effect the second most senior management position in the hotel'. The owners must have seen him as quite a catch, possessing as he did a degree in Catering from Lagos University (his Shank Of Missionary being a mouth-watering speciality). Unfortunately - and totally unexpectedly - some problems arose shortly after recruitment. Like spending months at a time out on 'sick leave', having a difficult time with biased and racist colleagues, threatening to strangle the hotel manager. And showering fellow employees, diners and their food with a virulent strain of the TB bacterium.

His lengthy appeal was of course funded in full by the Irish taxpayer. 

So yes, the law and immigration industry do benefit from diversity.  And who does not benefit?  Well just about everyone else really.

Sunday, 17 April 2016

A simple message for immigration status-whores

The current migrant crisis  invasion of Europe  makes life great for the virtue signalling status whores of the Left. In the comfort of their leafy suburbs and academic cloisters they incur neither physical nor intellectual discomfort. By the latter I mean that they don't have to address the practical ramifications of their hectoring.

Their position deems any rejection of migrants as a Bad Thing. This is evidenced by heart-rending pictures of starving women and children (it's considered rude to mention that about 80% of the invaders are fighting-age men) offset against a wealthy and selfish West. What's never addressed is the subject of limits. And that's because once you concede the need for limits in principle - even if some time in the far off future - you've blown away the 'just let them in' argument. In essence you're acknowledging that immigration must be based on a range of practical criteria.


But even the Swedes have been forced to face up to the implications and are now using heat imaging technology to detect invaders crossing their borders while admitting they'll need to expel more than 80,000 of those they so smugly allowed in.  So I suggest asking a simple question of any status-whore you need to interact with: Do you agree that there should be no limits to the numbers taken in? If not you admit that there's a need for an immigration policy. And if you agree with that you agree that immigrants pursue the approved channels. So let's start by shipping all of those rescued migrants back to the country they set out from.

It really is that simple.

Thursday, 14 April 2016

Remedying Korea's race problem

I've read recently that South Korea has been deemed the  most racist country in the world. The horror! Whether true or not a recent report from one of the UN's gravy train riders (the splendidly named Mutuma Ruteere - 'you can rut here, Mutuma') has identified severe problems. From his report and many others it seems the explanation lies in Koreans' ignorance of the wider world, and by implications the benefits of diversity. And I suppose we could forgive them that, given that they've done quite well on their own so far. For instance in 1957 they had the same per capita income as that of  pre 'independence' Ghana whereas now it's more than twenty times higher.

"In one way or another, racism affects almost every foreigner in Korea. But being black here is different. Whether African-American, African or not even black but mistaken for it, experiences in Korea are tainted by the perception that blacks are lower than other races: Blacks are violent, unintelligent and poor. Black Americans are not really American, and are inappropriate teachers for Korean children.  The local media continues to be flooded with racist sentiments, advertisements and perceptions. It’s painful and it’s widespread."

"Black people report difficulty getting taxis, even when Koreans and whites get them on the same street. Some say cab drivers go so far as to make illegal U-turns into traffic to avoid picking up black passengers. Some Koreans will refuse to get into elevators with black people, and will often change subway cars to avoid being near black passengers".

On the other hand “there were meanings associated with the color white – peace, being a peaceful people, purity,”

Oh dear.

And the cause of this wrong-headed view of the po' blacks?  It seems "American movies and music influenced Koreans to see blacks as dirty, poor, violent slum-dwellers. The U.S. way of looking at black people came to Korea so Korean people looked at black people just like Americans did.”

Right. So I have a great idea. Why doesn't the Western media create movies and TV shows with blacks in lead roles, as professors, doctors and scientists...and who are brave, intelligent and resourceful?  Why not include an occasional black person in an advertisement, and in a positive role?  Why not  affirmative action blacks into high positions, positions way beyond their abilities, even to the level of US President? Why not encourage White women to see black males as ideal mating material?

I know these are crazy ideas. We all know they represents an inversion of reality.  But wouldn't it be worth it were they to correct Korea's racism problem? And now here's another suggestion.  According to this Korean journalist 'our racism is based on sheer ignorance'. You see - and he's right - only a tiny number of Koreans (here are some) have had direct experience of living with blacks and their (cough) 'culture'. So why not organise Cultural Exchange Programs whereby groups of Koreans spend a few months soaking in the authentic Black Experience in say.....Haiti, East St. Louis, Camden, Liberia or Somalia.

It'd certainly cure them of their ignorance, that's for sure.

Sunday, 10 April 2016

On a point of order....

There's an interesting five-part review by Andrew Joyce of David Cesarani's Final Solution: The Fate of the Jews 1933-49  currently being published on the Occidental Observer.  Yes, believe it or not, a book on the Holocau$t at long last. 

While strongly recommending his article I must take issue with the following:

"I am not a “Holocaust denier” in the traditional understanding of the term. To wit, I am not preoccupied with quantities of coke, the mechanics of cremation, or the residual properties of prussic acid. I belong to a younger generation of European-descended people who weren’t born before, during, or immediately after World War Two. Like many members of the movement from my generation, while I can clearly see the disastrous effects of “Holocaust education” on young people (and the whole of Germany in particular), I never felt the same urgency to dispel propaganda, specific narratives, or accusations that older movement members seemed desperate to over-turn.

My generation grew up with news of large-scale ethnic conflicts in Rwanda and Cambodia..... Efforts to inform my generation that mass killings had taken place in this or that corner of an East European forest (and four decades before their birth) lacked the power to shock or injure than it might otherwise have done.  We interacted with [the Holocaust], but we found it lacking."

Judging by that I assume Andrew is Generation Y. And while I'm more like generation A or B my experience of younger folk tells me that actually they have fully bought into the wheeze. In fact I know several who've made the Auschwitz Pilgrimage where they gladly underwent the prescribed programming, returning infused with an even deeper sense of White Guilt. Be that as it may, my main concern relates to his dismissing the significance of the Holocau$t and the importance of exposing the fraud for what it is.

I say this because the Holocau$t has in many ways become the embodiment of the 20th Century. It has been wielded with uncanny skill to silence (and incarcerate) critics of Jews or Israel, to extract billions from unfortunate guilt-ridden German taxpayers, and to transform the status of an aggressive and acquisitive people into that of  Ultimate Victim.**

As with the 9/11 attacks, should the general public become aware of the breathtaking scale of the fraud, and the tsunami of lies and obfuscation with which it has been maintained, the consequences would fundamentally transform political and economic life in the West.  And without such exposure things will pretty much go on as they are until we Whites become marginalised and dispossessed in the countries our ancestors built.

** A subsequent comment to this post by B7Scorpio powerfully expands on  this thesis.

"The official version of WWII with the Holocaust as it's centrepiece has become the founding myth of the contemporary West.

What is a founding myth and what does it do? It is a universally known story featuring fundamental archetypes that (1) explains the origin and structure of the world, (2) defines ultimate Good and Evil (from which are then derived the values used to justify the possession of power) and (3) defines what is held sacred in that society. 

The WWII myth fulfils all three functions.

1) We live in the 'post-war world'. The institutions (the UN, the IMF, the World Bank, the World Trade Organisation etc.) all have their ultimate origins coming out of WWII. The borders of key European states were settled after the war. Even the assumption that liberal democracy is the default model for all states follows WWII. (The Cold War froze things for a while but WWII is the key origin point). To repeat: we live in the 'post-war world'.

2) Ultimate Evil is Nazis. Good is simply that which opposes Nazis. The values of our society (anti-racism, tolerance, diversity etc.) follow from these definitions. 

3) The only thing that is held sacred in the contemporary West is the Holocaust.

Seeing WWII and the Holocaust as a founding myth (and a myth that almost all White people believe in!) explains why it has so much power over our people. It also explains why White identity has been so neutered. A society's founding myth sets both the boundaries of allowable political thought as well as the determining centre around which all thought is orientated. White identity politics is powerless as long as the myth holds because the myth says White identity = Nazis = evil so any attempt at White advocacy is disprivileged before it even begins. As long as the Holocaust remains 'holy' the anti-White power holds the ultimate meta-political trump card.

"The Holocaust myth really is a poison wellspring that is psychologically and consequently physically killing our people. The problem is that all three functions of the myth are negative for White people instead of positive. Everything is backwards.

Instead of the origin of the world being something creative and bountiful it is an event of horrific death and destruction.

Instead of ultimate Good being at the centre of the myth, ultimate Evil (Nazis) is placed at the centre. Ultimate Good (Americans dying on Omaha beach for example) is merely reactive. The 'evil' of white racialism, with Adolf Hitler as the devil, occupies the centre-point of the story.

And instead of that which society holds sacred being something beautiful and sublime it is something shameful and obscene (the Holocaust).

The myth really is an anti-myth for White people which means it is spiritual poison.

Unless we break the spell this myth has over our people it's hard to see how we will recover. At the moment our enemies determine the mental frame in which our people think. 

Deprogramming White people out of the kosher WWII myth is vital. Does that mean we have to defend Hitler's National Socialist Germany? Do we need to somehow turn the myth inside out? Transmutate the myth from negative to positive with the Third Reich as heroes and the anti-German powers as forces serving evil? I don't know. But I'm pretty sure being 'red-pilled' about the Holocaust and WWII is transformational. Because once their psychological weapon of calling you 'Nazi' no longer works what else have they got?"

PS: Uncle Nasty...a compatriot of your wants to contact you. If interested would you email me at [email protected]

Wednesday, 6 April 2016

"It's oh so beautiful...."

The revolution devours itself, the snake eats its own tail. And it's happening at an increasing rate. I refer here to the vibrants turning on White women, even when they're (cough) 'liberal'. Examples abound but this one takes this biscuit, involving as it does liberal Genocidist Madeleine Albright, the crone who thought tens of thousands of Iraqi children starving to death to be 'worth it'. (Remember when she suddenly discovered her Jewish origins at the time of her Senate Confirmation hearings? Instantly rendering any objections to her as 'anti-Semitic'.)

For quite a while she's been a liberal feminist icon but, as I mentioned at the beginning, things are changing. An invitation for her to speak at a swanky all female school has been met with a fusillade of objections because she's 'White' (she's not, of course) and a 'genocide enabler' (which she is). 'Just SO MANY white women' wailed one student. So yes, just like in France and Russia after their Revolutions the list of enemies expands. Being a woman is no longer enough to protect your place on the Victimhood Hierarchy. You have to be a non-White woman.

How this plays out in the greater scheme of things remains to be seen. But White women, even liberals and feminists, will increasingly face tough choices. And Jews are being caught up in the maelstrom as well. Hitherto, with great skill and agility, they oscillated between White and non-White depending on the circumstances. So where massively over-represented (i.e. wherever the pickings were good) they became White to mask the disparity. On the other hand when being held to account for misbehaviour they reverted to being long-suffering victimised Jews. (Albright's ploy referred to above represents another example of the tactic.)

But that's changing as well. Blacks, Latinos, Muslims - almost all vibrants in fact - don't give a hoot about the distinction between Jews and Whites. Still less do they appreciate the work Jews have done on their behalf. (Of course it was not done on behalf of the vibrants. They were just ancillary beneficiaries of the War On Whites). And this Scylla is being met on the other side by the Charybdis of Whites awakening to the war being waged on them. Admittedly the Great White Beast still slumbers but now twitches ominously as his tormentors grow increasingly brazen.

I don't know what's going to happen or when. But for certain the trends I refer to are real and will have great significance.

Crack open the popcorn and enjoy the show!

Sunday, 3 April 2016

Living - for now - testaments to the New Woman

Fascinating to watch 'em crash and burn, victims of their own design. Madonna and Angelina Jolie, the embodiment of the spirit of the New Woman, of Having It All. Sexually active while barely into their teens, an unfathomable number of subsequent partners (of both sexes), glittering careers, vast wealth, late onset "families", some of whom were purchased ready-made, home-wrecking, abandoned marriages (...AJ says of her first husband 'the greatest husband a girl could have......but I needed freedom'), feted and rewarded for dishing out democracy and women's rights to all those cute faces the rest of us see only on TV.

What more could the independent grrrlll of today ask for?

But now?  Being nearly twenty years older than she, Madonna reveals what awaits Jolie.  Excluding paid hangers-on she's now abandoned, alone and unwanted, so detested by her dysfunctional "family" that she used the law on her son when he chose in desperation to flee to his father. A bitter, squalling hair-trigger shrew, ricocheting between rage and self-pity as she frantically struggles to hang on to her collapsing career, each performance becoming more and more an exercise in self-parody.

And Angelina? Twenty five years of feminist freedom have left her a physical and emotional wreck with yet another disintegrating marriage and a squad of  mainly purchased children spiralling out-of-control. Luckily her non-stop filming, human rights status-whoring and stints in rehab mean she incurs minimal personal inconvenience from these little horrors. But pity the surrogate parents!

At least Madonna and Angelina have the wealth to purchase hangers-on and luxury. And, catastrophic as the results might have been, they have fulfilled their basic biological imperative by spawning their own offspring. But what about the ordinary woman, seduced during  her (long vanished) youth by the feminist illusion, and now toiling at her useless career in a tiny impersonal cubicle? For every Angelina or Madonna there are literally millions like her, and for whom a bleak future beckons.

Having decided to put off settling down she's horrified at the speed with which her child-bearing years are disappearing, while all those disposable 'good men' whom she confidently put to one side at an earlier time are no longer available, being married and/or interested only in girls a lot younger than she. The liberated kind  of girl who dispenses sexual favours with reckless she herself used to do. But now as her eggs atrophy in her drying ovaries she's doomed to an atomised life with just cats as a surrogate family, doomed to negotiate a Darwinian cul-de-sac.

While I do feel a small tinge of schadenfreude at the fate of such women I also recognise that they're victims. Victims of feminism, the single most evil and destructive movement ever to beset the White race.  A curse which most of us, men and women, have fallen under at one time or another. We now need to unambiguously proclaim that this has been a Jewish movement from start to finish, a fundamental component of the Cultural Marxist Revolution developed to destroy the White Christian family and with it the unique civilisation to which it gave birth. Feminism's intellectual genesis in the Frankfurt School, its icons such as Frieden and Dworkin, and its brainwashing enablers in news and entertainment have been overwhelmingly Jewish. As long as this central reality is denied or ignored there never will be a solution, a solution whereby our women revert to being friends and partners, not adversaries.

So let the deprogramming begin!