The 'War on Terror': A Neo Con Zionist Conspiracy of Lies

When will idiots, liberals and Neo-Cons ever learn?

Afghanistan: unwinnable and stupid war against people previously backed by CIA, with no link to 911. Corrupt pro-Western govt. put in place with links to heroin trade.
Iraq: unjustifiable and stupid war against a people with no link to 911 who kept "Islamicists" in check. Chaos created in which 'terrorists' multiply.
Libya: unjustifiable and stupid war against a people who fought "Islamicists" and kept them in check. Chaos ensues in which "Islamicists" (our erstwhile allies in the war, armed and trained by CIA etc) turn on Europeans, and spread war southwards.
Syria: unjustifiable and stupid war in which rebels are armed and trained by CIA etc. to bring chaos to an anti-Zionist country which had kept "Islamicists" in check.
Mali: Civil War amplified by "Islamicists" trained and armed by CIA in Libya, drawing in the French (and UK/USA as in Libya).
Saudi Arabia: Extremist Muslim dictatorship from which most of the "911 suspects" came from which supresses its people. No war.
Israel: Extremist, racist, genocidal state which breaks international law with impunity and has broken untold UN resolutions. Its agents were stopped in NYC on 911 with traces of explosives on them. No war.

One is tempted to think that the reason the CIA et al went into Libya, as well as to bring down an anti-Zionist and anti-usury nation, was to help 'Muslim extremists' there spread their agenda across North Africa and so create another, new chapter for their 'War on Terror' and so ensure money keeps flowing into the military big businesses, Zionist pressure groups and similar.

If all this confuses you, ask yourself this one question:

IF THE MAIN JUSTIFICATION FOR THE 'WAR ON TERROR' IS TO FIGHT 'MILITANT ISLAM' why oh why then have "the West" armed, trained and helped those very same Islamicists in Libya since the 1980s, and in Syria since the Civil War began?

IF THE MAIN JUSTIFICATION FOR THE 'WAR ON TERROR' IS FOR REVENGE ON 911 why oh why then have the states with the strongest links, Saudi Arabia and Israel still retained the status as America's greatest allies.

It all has the stench of Orwell's Big Brother lying to us.

Even a cursory look at the geo-political alliances, adventures and objectives should make you realise that we are being lied to on a grand scale!

Iran: Going to War to Defend a State with Illegal Nukes?

It's OK! America and Hollywood will save us all.

This article is interesting. However it misses the recent idea that there will be a false flag attack on an American ship (possibly by Israel as happened with the USS Liberty) which could be blamed on Iran.

That aside, plenty to chew over here:

Oh - btw - Happy St David's Day for yesterday for all our Welsh readers and supporters.



From the Alexander Higgins blog.

ISRAEL, ARMAGEDDON AND THE STRENGTH OF IRAN
The most important thing I’ve read these last few days is the excellent article ‘Armageddon Approaches’ written by Dr Lasha Darkmoon , a cautionary piece which points the reader towards some very scary background information.
For example, according to Russ Winter of The Wall Street Examiner , Iran’s Sunburn missiles, acquired from Russia and China over the last 10 years, have the capability of creating “a world of hurt” for the US Navy’s 5th Fleet.
“The Sunburn is perhaps the most lethal anti-ship missile in the world, designed to fly as low as 9 feet above ground/water at more than 1,500 miles per hour (mach 2+). The missile uses a violent pop-up maneuver for its terminal approach to throw off Phalanx and other US anti-missile defense systems. Given their low cost, they’re perfectly suited for close quarter naval conflict in the bathtub-like Persian Gulf.”
With its 90-mile range, the Sunburn can be fired from practically any platform, including a flat bed truck, and could hit a ship in the Strait in less than a minute.
Adding this warning, Mark Gaffney says , “The US Navy has never faced anything in combat as formidable as the Sunburn missile.”
He mentions the even more-advanced SS-NX-26 Yakhonts missiles, also Russian-made (speed: Mach 2.9; range: 180 miles) deployed by the Iranians along the Persian Gulf’s northern shore.
“Every US ship will be exposed and vulnerable. When the Iranians spring the trap, the entire lake will become a killing field,”
“In the Gulf’s shallow and confined waters evasive manoeuvres will be difficult, at best, and escape impossible. Even if US planes control of the skies over the battlefield, the sailors caught in the net below will be hard-pressed to survive. The Gulf will run red with American blood.”
As both writers point out, the Iranians will have mapped every firing angle along their Gulf coastline. And the rugged terrain will not make detection easy.
“Shooting fish in a barrel”, but who are the fish this time?
Britain recently announced the deployment of HMS Daring, a new Type 45 destroyer, to the Persian Gulf in order to send a significant message to the Iranians because of the firepower and world-beating technology carried by this warship. A Daily Telegraph report says she has been fitted with new technology that will give it the ability to “shoot down any missile in Iran’s armory. The £1 billion destroyer also carries the world’s most sophisticated naval radar, capable of tracking multiple incoming threats from missiles to fighter jets.” Her 48 Sea Vipers can shoot down fighters as well as sea skimming missiles.
Apart from HMS Daring, Britain is believed to have at least 3 other vessels in the Persian Gulf, and more can be sent. Are they all equipped with the same world-beating technology?
Dr Darkmoon observes, “Both America and Israel are unfortunately just not ready to wage the type of warfare they prefer to wage and at which they so excel: shooting fish in a barrel. Unlike Iraq, which the warmonger neoconservatives told us would be a ‘cakewalk’ – easily conquered in six weeks – Iran is unlikely to offer its American and Israeli antagonists easy opportunities to indulge in their fish-in-a-barrel fantasies.”
The spectacle of the world’s school-yard bully, the United States, flanked by hooligan helpmates Britain, France and Canada all menacing Iran is building up to a chilling climax. If what I’m reading is correct, British ships in the bathtub of the Persian Gulf will be among the fish in the barrel on this occasion, with Iran doing the shooting. Britain’s chief hooligans, William Hague and David Cameron, could be courting disaster for the much-vaunted HMS Daring. Why are they getting us involved anyway? It’s obviously not for Britain, whose best interests are served by making friends and doing business with Iran.
No, they suffer the same delusions as their erstwhile partner in crime, the disgraced former Defence Secretary Liam Fox and the many others in our Parliamentary establishment who have swallowed the daft idea that Israel’s enemies are Britain’s enemies. How much sense can you expect from people who are signed-up Friends of Israel – in Hague’s case since the tender age of 15?Diplomacy? What diplomacy?
As the whole world surely knows by now, the US-British track record in Iran doesn’t bear examination. And when they get on their high horse and spout about democracy everyone falls about laughing. Who overthrew Iran’s fledgling democracy in 1953? Who trashed Palestine’s democracy in 2006? Who keeps banging on about Israel being the “only democracy in the Middle East” when, actually, it’s a racist ethnocracy?
For over 30 years Britain has had no high-level diplomatic contact with Iran except for Jack Straw’s visits a decade ago. Hague won’t answer questions about the diplomatic efforts he has made, if any. In a fit of lunacy he shut down the embassy in Tehran last year and chucked the Iranians out of London, and he’s now straining at the bit to get our young men needlessly embroiled in what is essentially a nuke-bristling US/Israel quarrel with non-nuke Iran… the ulterior motive and ultimate prize being Iran’s oil.
The US hasn’t had a proper embassy in Tehran since 1979. But a few months ago it set up a virtual embassy with this sick-making address to the Iranian people .
“We have created Virtual Embassy Tehran to offer you another perspective and another source of information, so you can make up your own minds about the US, our concerns about the Iranian government’s activities at home and abroad, and our serious efforts to achieve a resolution to those concerns,”
“This website is not a formal diplomatic mission, nor does it represent or describe a real US Embassy accredited to the Iranian Government. But, in the absence of direct contact, it can work as a bridge between the American and Iranian people.”
As President Obama said earlier this year and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton affirmed in her recent VOA and BBC appearances, “You – the young people of Iran – carry within you both the ancient greatness of Persian civilization, and the power to forge a country that is responsive to your aspirations. Your talent, your hopes, and your choices will shape the future of Iran, and help light the world. And though times may seem dark, I want you to know that I am with you,”
“It is in that spirit that we launch our Virtual US Embassy Tehran. It is our Mission to the Iranian people.”
Yeah, a US mission that’s accompanied by vicious sanctions imposed with the help of gullible friends like Britain and the EU and calculated to cripple Iran’s economy and make the lives of its young people hell. The consequences for us are damaging too.
Britain’s defence chief Philip Hammond, who replaced Fox after the scandal that exposed his ‘special friend’ Adam Werritty and behind-scenes plotting with Israel against Iran, has publicly warned Iran that any blockade of the Strait of Hormuz would be “illegal and unsuccessful”.
But why escalate matters to the point where a blockade becomes likely? And why, asks Dr Darkmoon, do it for Israel anyway? “Cui bono? Iran has much more to offer America than Israel does,”
“Iran has oil in abundance, Israel has none. Iran does not hold America’s political class to ransom. Iran does not try to browbeat successive American administrations into putting Iranian interests before American ones. Iran’s dual citizens do not spy on America or sell American military secrets to Russia and China-there are no Iranian Rosenbergs or Jonathan Pollards. Iran does not coerce Americans into fighting and dying for it in foreign wars. Iran does not expect $3 billion a year in handouts, and even more in loan guarantees that never get repaid,”
“Iran would be a far greater asset to America than Israel could ever be. Israel is a liability and a burden,”
“More fool America for cuddling up to a ‘friend’ who has stabbed it in the back in the past – the Lavon affair, the USS Liberty incident, the Jonathan Pollard betrayal – and is more than likely to stab it in the back again at some time in the foreseeable future,”
“Dump Israel. That’s my advice. Before Israel sets the world on fire, taking America with it.”
The question certainly needs to be asked, she says, “What hold does Israel have over America? Is America prepared to sustain immense damage to its vital interests on behalf of an unstable and insolent ally that remains, if numerous polls are to be believed, the world’s most hated nation?”
Ask it here too. What hold does Israel have over Britain? The only people impressed by Israel are MPs and ministers whom the pro-Israel lobby has ‘groomed’ and funded, the Jewish community (though by no means all of them) and a rabble of Christian Zionists; no-one else. And no-one else wants to fight Israel’s unjust wars or help America do Israel’s dirty work.
So if Hague, Hammond and Cameron love Israel so much let them and the regime’s other admirers don uniform and flak-jacket and go play battleships in the Persian Gulf’s “bathtub” themselves. Who in their right mind would volunteer to be that trio’s cannon-fodder?

The Stuff that Zionists Say

There is some weird stuff in this video, and the makers obviously include liberals and Jews, but it does contain some interesting material to cogitate upon...

The sad thing is (the way we have all been controlled in a 1984-stylee) unless there are Jews involved in such discourse, the Neo Cons, Zionists and suchlike just say "it's anti-semitic" as if that closes down all discussion.

With "British nationalists" addressing meetings to the (officially designated 'terrorist') JDL in Canada it's a weird world we live in!

Are You For or Against a Corrupt Zionist Regime?

Have a look at this great montage. Again it shows the hypocrisy of "the West" - i.e. the political and media class.

The last time I made a comparison between the (Real) IRA and the Syrian insurrectionists, and the treatment of them by the BBC (chalk and cheese) when they shoot soldiers, I had one or two dullards and/or nonces stirring up quite the hornet's nest on here.

So, just to let you know, I am not an anarchist any more than I am an Islamist (or "democrat") Arab insurrectionist. I know, I know... but you'd be amazed at what trolls, idiots and numpties will read into a post!

Of course - the rioters in Cairo were fighting against a Zionist puppet regime that had acted against the interests of the indigenous people for decades... whereas in England we have... a 'democracy.' Mwah ha ha!

The BBC treated Irish and Syrian armed gangs who shoot soldiers, policemen etc, quite differently; they also treat those who riot against governments controlled by vested interests quite differently.

As always (e.g. when dealing with Libya or Saudi Arabia ruling families, Iran or Israel's nuclear realities, Serbian or American 'war crimes') the BBC twists the news to fit a specifically British State agenda, and to pretend otherwise is ridiculous. As our state is Zionist (i.e. in the pockets of Masonic bankers/financiers and hardline pro-Israel) the litmus test seems to be whether a regime is pro-Israeli or Israel-tolerant. Of course in international diplomacy nothing is so straightforward. France, for example has gone from "bad" to "good" under Sarkozy (I wonder why) from a regime which tended to oppose Zionist wars to one which is far more in favour of them (it is highly questionable that the French people changed that much!)

That some British nationalists (still!) worship the Westminster State and are still following certain paths and herded in certain pens, thanks to years of brainwashing and State propaganda speaks volumes. The blinkers still aren't off. And so we see a "hurrah" for 'plucky' David Cameron who stands up to the Euro Beast... to defend the rights of financiers in the City of London, who in turn show little or no loyalty to the UK (always threatening to leave these shores if taxes are raised, for example)

The plastic patriots who cheered on 'Call me Dave' Cameron used to be the Imperialists, who cheered as Britain planted flags in India, Africa, and even in Calais and Gibraltar (but who would go to war if Spain or France claimed the Isle of Wight). Of course, they were too dumb to realise that eventually the Indians and Africans would return the favour and colonise us - now they want to claim as a right what their political forebears denied the Indians and Africans -- independence, nationalism and their own country run by their own kind.

The jingoism of Empire was in reality a form of multi-culturalism which celebrated money, profits and greed above all else. There was little or no altruism, no seeking what was best for "us" or "them." The British (unlike for example the Spaniards) did not even have the good grace to convert the heathens. Speaking to an Indian (Hindu) on a train recently he told me that most Christians in India are Catholic, with one small area also Methodist (after a Methodist missionary went there). The impact of Anglicanism, given that England ran India for so many years, was minimal indeed. Just imagine (and this is pure conjecture of course and not seen as the be-all and end-all) an India and Pakistan that was converted to a form of Christianity, instead of just bled dry and turned against each other as Britain sought to 'divide and rule' with Muslims and Hindus.

We might even have no nuclear powers playing tit for tat wars with each other, and no Muslim stronghold (used by the CIA and its enemies) to "export terror" as and when needed. Or look at Japan, which was on the verge of becoming Christian thanks to missionaries from Mediterranean lands. It was Dutch and English traders who persuaded the Japanese rulers who weren't Christian (about half) that this was some kind of threat from Portugal or Spain which would then "take over" and so Christians were massacred, crucified en masse, and often mutilated by having their feet cut off. It was the money-men of Amsterdam and London who stopped Japan becoming Christian... imagine the impact in WW2? History may have been so different. It may even have impacted on China, preventing the rise of Communism... who knows?

It was money and profits that drove the British Empire, and it was (as usual!) GK Chesterton who saw the future problems this early globalism would bring. I found this interesting text/review online, about an essay on Patriotism by GKC. It is so good I would urge everyone to read it two or three times and to keep a copy for future reference:

There is, however, another enemy of Patriotism and Nationalism. It is equipped with power and wealth and a good chance of success in practical politics and it is but the disguise of cosmopolitanism. It is Imperialism, or as we would say, 'Globalism'. In Chesterton's opinion the Empire was neither for the benefit nor the glory of the English, it was for their exploitation. We had been put to work, to suffer, to bleed and to die, for the benefit of international banking and trade, that is, 'Globalism', and when we had served our purpose the assets would be stripped and lodged elsewhere. The price of such glory as we might enjoy from seeing the map painted red, was our impoverishment, our deculturation, our mongrelization, our destruction as a Nation. Chesterton presented this succinctly in 'The Flying Inn'(1904) "Did you ever hear the great destiny of Empire? It is in four acts: Victory over barbarians. Employment of barbarians. Alliance with barbarians. Conquest by barbarians. That is the great destiny of Empire."

GK Chesterton saw mass immigration into Britain decades before it happened, whilst the ideological forebears of today's plastic patriots, Westminster State worshippers to  a man, were singing God Save the King, down with the Frenchies/Krauts (delete as applicable) in short, much as most of them still do today!

They sung/sing a hymn to a Queen who has rubber stamped laws on homosexuality, abortion and divorce (and mass immigration/anti-racislism!) that have ripped this country apart. She swore to be a Christian Monarch on her accession to the throne, an oath she swore to God; but just as the wedding oaths sworn by so many, it was meaningless - as their weddings were dissolved by man, might we wonder if her monarchy should be dissolved by man? How can a Christian Monarch pass laws as she has? She even made the architect of the 1967 Abortion Law (which resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent Britons) a Lord!!! How preposterous is that? ...and we have Charles "defender of (multi-)faiths" waiting in the side-lines.

If Elizabeth II had an ounce of decency she would have stepped down as monarch, or stood firm to uphold her oath. This, I believe, is the basic argument of much of the Lawful Rebellion crowd. If the crown is void (a kind of British 'sede vacante' - vacant seat - position if you will) then when we enter the courts controlled by the crown, they have lost the authority to judge us. If we do not recognise the crown as legitimate, having broken the Coronation Oath (as usury, abortion and homosexuality to name but three, are anti-Christian), then it has no right to levy taxes on us -- for its illegal wars, its pro-queer bodies, its abortion-performing structures and for its repayments on usury debts.

But let us return to nationhood. GKC once said that the patriot loves his country, whereas an imperialist wants to invade his neighbours. I said in a recent post that WW2's very basis was flawed given that we were conned into taking part in a war that was for the freedom of Poland, but resulted in handing over the entirety of Poland to one of the very powers that had invaded it in September 1939 (but which bizarrely we did not declare war on!): the USSR.

For me, one of the faults with National Socialist Germany was that it was, at its very core imperialist. The Reich was to expand. Austria was a fascist country with a superb economic basis on which it was building structures for the Common God that were building a socially strong and confident Austria. Even Poland was nationalist and had stood up to Soviet Communism. Today it would be painted by liberals as "fascist." The sad fact is that both these countries were taken over by a Germany whose very basis was imperial growth. It was its imperialism rather than any perceived "fascism" or "socialism" that proved its downfall.

"Chesterton’s distaste for state socialism, his suspicion of monopoly capitalism, and his support for the independence from imperial domination of small nations like Poland..."

from the GK Chesterton Society's conference 2011 blurb

As nationalists, we must be nationalists! This is the basis of this rather meandering post. We must stand up for our own nation. We must not be imperialists, we do not want or need empires. We must realise that we love our nation(s), but that does not mean we must worship the state. We must disassociate worship of the Westminster State from love of nation.

This is a debate that nationalists need to have, especially in light of devolution, a monarch and state that are promoting homosexuality and abortion, the collapse of the Euro and the ongoing take-over of our lands by non-Europeans, which the state is defending to the detriment of our people!

Regardless of the permutations in the arguments that fly back and forth, the one thing that we have to realise above all else is that as nationalists today, the state that rules over us, which has promoted multi-racism, destroyed Christianity, pulled apart the family, promoted illegal Zionist wars, and pushes its twisted propaganda as news on the BBC, is not "ours" - it is not British, English or whatever - it is in the pockets of financiers with no national loyalty, it is bought and paid for by the men who rule the Lodges who wreck our lives, yet it expects our loyalty too??? We'd have to be mad!

That is the British State as it stands, that is why we owe it no loyalty. It, the Queen, her governments and the Lodges behind them all, have betrayed the peoples of these isles on every single imaginable level. The law is not only an ass, but a law that breaks almost every single moral law (from deadening usury, to sterile homosexuality, to the multi-racism that destroys, to the mass death of abortion), has to make us realise that we are living under a regime that has sold us and our children into perpetual slavery, taxation-debt and degeneracy.

That's why, when I see an anarchist bashing a police van in London, whether it is a demo over student loans, big brother or against another war -- despite the fact that he may need a "damn good wash" (copyright 1970s NF) and support more than a few dubious causes -- I see very little difference between those demonstrating against a corrupt, pro-Israeli regime in the pockets of the money-men, who treat the indigenous people like crap; and the demonstrators in Cairo.

The Irish Minister Who Wished Ireland had Fought Germany (Preparing for Iran?)

Alan Shatter TD, Minister for Justice & Equality

As I mentioned the other day, it was recently Holocaust Memorial Day, and there was the usual smattering of WW2 propaganda dressed up as sob-stories to pull at one's heart strings in the media (though thankfully less than previous years). I believe one newspaper even gave out a free onion which readers could peel in a pocket if they were insufficiently moved; not incidentally by stories of the gulags, of firestorms, of Cossacks or Caucasus communities wiped out en masse... no the suffering seems limited to just a few - really, just one - group of people.

And the stoopidest story? Well we've all heard of the real fairy tales of different coloured smoke for different nationalities being incinerated and other miracles (read Michael Hoffman's revisionist cartoon book for some of the best - I think it was called Tales of the Holocaust). But for this year the worst statement has to come from Alan Shatter (how apt!), the Irish Justice Minister, who said:

"in the context of the holocaust, Irish neutrality was a principle of moral bankruptcy."

I wonder how well that went down in Ireland! He's trying to link the Irish with the Swiss (and Spaniards and Portuguese, and Swedish) in that by our modern misconceptions and after 60 plus years of WW2 war propaganda no nation should have stayed out of WW2! It was everyones' duty, according to him and the "wisdom" of this (Zionist) media age in the shadow of umpteen Hollywood films, to join the war and fight Nazi Germany!

And here we have the dichotomy of nationalism, especially for those who haven't moved on from the last century. Many British nationalists think WW2 was wonderful, historically speaking. The 'patriots' of groups like UKIP (and to a lesser extent the BNP, English Democrats, EDL and suchlike) still talk in terms of Germany taking-over Europe. Then we have the National Socialists in groups like the British Movement to whom Hitler could do no wrong (even when he backed anti-British Indians and the IRA), and it was the duty of all racial patriots to fight for Germany, especially against Soviet Russia. I suppose you might say the difference is like that between former blackshirts AK Chesterton who joined the British Army, and William Joyce who went to Berlin and broadcast for Hitler's Germany.

And in the middle are the nationalists who aren't NS, but aren't worshippers of the Westminster State either, who to one degree or another think that "No More Brothers Wars" is the ideal, and that the war was ultimately fought for bankers. Some may think that Hitler played into their hands. Others may think he was their victim.

Wherever you fall in this sliding scale of State/Racial Nationalism (and I know it's oversimplified, but how else may one express it rather than going into a 10,000 word essay?) you would have to be some kind of uber-moron to call on all neutral nations to enter a war which was primarily between France/Britain and Germany; America and Russia not joining the Allies until 1941 - the former from official neutrality (albeit the US State was backing Britain, though charging interest), the latter from a hitherto pro-German standpoint (ordering its acolytes in Britain to all but sabotage the war effort in factories and suchlike).

Given that Ireland had fairly recent memories of not only a war against Britain, but also a fratricidal Civil War in which many Irish families even fought against each other, it is highly dubious and a gross rewriting of history to suggest Ireland should have fought Germany in WW2. Like most neutral nations there is evidence of Ireland leaning one way or another. Many UKIPers and the like point to their telegram to Germany in 1945 to commiserate on the death of their Fuhrer. Yet historians have shown how Ireland helped the Allies by marking points on the Atlantic coast as navigation aids for the Allies. Just as neutral Argentina tended to lean towards Germany (at least in the first half of the war), so neutral Ireland leaned towards the British, e.g. handing over downed German pilots.

Yet according to Mr Shatter (no, I really haven't made that up) Ireland should have sent hundreds of thousands of its men to die in a war started to protect Poland from a power that invaded it in September 1939, which ended by handing over the entirety of Poland (and other European nations) to a power that... er... invaded it in September 1939.


What a waste.

Of course the difference is "the holocaust." As Mr, Shatter dribbled (no doubt busy peeling his free onion) it was "in the context of the holocaust." That is why, 60 odd years on we still have holocaust propaganda; because without it, WW2 would be just like WW1 for most people -- a colossal waste of lives, of money, of time. It is only "the holocaust" that differentiates WW2, and makes it some sort of "holy war" to free Europe's Jews, and deliver them to freedom (by letting them occupy Palestine).

It is all one long trick, a con trick to justify a war that did not give Poland her freedom, that levelled European cities only to deliver Poland to 50 odd years of Communist slavery and tyranny. e.g. we never hear of the amount of Poles who died in WW2, or the number of Poles incarcerated in German concentration camps, or in Soviet gulags - never mind atrocities such as Katyn. When Poles went to Auschwitz in 1998 to erect crosses in memory of all the Poles who were kept in the work camps (and those who died in them) it was Zionist Jews who poured urine over the Poles, said the crosses must be removed, and engaged in a huge campaign to evict nuns who had set-up at Auschwitz (which the Church shamefully capitulated to).

Even if they accept the fictitious "six million" you see, there is no way the Polish people can be allowed to distract people from the holocaust story. The Poles aren't allowed to show that Polish Christians suffered, that the Polish nation was ripped apart, that Poles were displaced and killed, and that (most tellingly of all!) 6 years of war, launched on the pretext of freeing Poland, delivered Poland into 5 decades of gulags, murder, torture, suffering and totalitarian repression.

As Brits looking back we are told that we must remember the liberation of Auschwitz and Dachau. We cannot be allowed to remember the liberation of Poland, because despite being the central war aim -- and especially as it never happened despite being the pretext of war in 1939!

If I were an Irishman, I would slap Mr Shatter in the face with an old kipper. No, Ireland should not have entered WW2. It had no duty to do so. Not one Irishman was threatened, Ireland's sovereignty was not threatened. Tens of thousands of Irish lives were saved by Ireland's decision not to enter WW2 and there is no evidence that one single Jewish death (e.g. from typhus due to Allied mass bombing of German infrastructure in 1945) could have been averted. If the holohoax is to be used (or according to those like Prof Norman Finkelstein, abused), then Ireland's decision was justified, and if Poland's freedom is to be used, then Ireland's decision was justified too.

Some UKIPers and Freemasons may mislabel the Irish as traitors (to whom?). Some Zionists may like to think all neutral nations should not have been neutral ("in the context of the holocaust").

But what does this matter today? Well, those nations who say no to Zionist controlled America (Israel's mouthpiece) when it comes to highly questionable wars, whether old ones (like Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya) or new ones (like Syria and Iran) are often called cowards, traitors etc. The misquoted, out of context words of Iran's Ahmadinajad (about "wiping Israel off the map") are used as if to apply the same holocaustianity-lined pressure on neutral countries who question the legality of wars against sovereign nations on highly questionable, flimsy or put-up ("sexed up" if you will) evidence.

Historically neutral or non-Zionist countries (like Ireland) should be free to question the geo-political events as they unfurl, not least events such as the Israeli commando assault on the charity flotilla heading for Palestine, which had a lot of support in Ireland.

Sadly the words of Mr Shatter increase the myth of the holocaust, increase it's "Holy" nature, its position as the centre of a new religion (a kind of gentile Phariseeism whose aim is the total protection of Israel) and that is why Mr Shatter's words are not about a war in the middle of the last century; rather they reflect on the geo-political events of today.

How long before politicians, in Ireland and elsewhere, are telling us all that another war is necessary lest "another holocaust" happens? A line already used, incidentally, by the likes of Melanie Philips, David Aaronovitch and the other paid mouthpieces of Israel in our controlled media; and so undoubtedly the line of attack in Western countries by Israel itself.

Mr Shatter's "in the context of the holocaust, Irish neutrality was a principle of moral bankruptcy" is already being translated into the British politicians' "in the context of the holocaust, British neutrality on the matters of Syria and Iran is a principle of moral bankruptcy."

===



P.S. I do not expect trolls, Zionists and Reds to believe me; but on searching for an image of Mr Alan Shatter, Irish Minister for Justice & Equality, I found out from Wikipedia: "Shatter was born in Dublin to a Jewish family... He supports Tottenham Hotspur Football Club,^[2] and is the only Jewish member of Dáil Éireann."

I had no idea when I wrote the above piece that Mr. Shatter is Jewish (or stereotypically a Spurs supporter) - merely that his comments were extraordinarily twisted and working to an agenda. This supports my thesis that Mr Shatter's comments aren't so much/only about rewriting Irish history, but of pushing an agenda for accepting future wars that are in Israel's interests and those of extreme Zionists, Neo Con warmongers and those who seek to profit from needless war (and not the Irish, British or any other disinterested peoples).

Swastikas in North London?

This banner by "American Israelis for Peace" is of course, not in North London.

But I wonder what would happen if it were displayed there.

None of the symbols are illegal (no, not even the Kabbalistic black magic Star of Ephraim) and as the banner's makers are Jews, it could hardly be called "anti-Semitic."

Yet you and I know that if such a banner were displayed in North London, the institutionally-pc police, acting on the orders of their bosses and the politicians (who meet for cosy chats at the Lodge), would probably say it was illegal on the grounds of racial aggravation or breaching the peace.

Kerching. Who pays the piper calls the tune.

Searchlight Get it Wrong: Stalinist Conspiracy Nutters Strike Again

Searchlies get it oh so wrong - again!

An old friend (in the sense of our acquaintance rather than his age) sent me a link earlier today to a piece in Searchlies magazine which proposes a conspiracy involving the Front National, Vichy French "war criminals," all manner of "anti-Semites" (of course!), Traditionalist Catholics, a "New Right" faction, revisionists, Mosleyites, occultists and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all.

The article had as its bete noir, Bishop Williamson (oh they mentioned his dubious excommunication, but not that it had been publicly lifted) and yet they could not even get the right cleric in the photo accompanying the piece! Is it a case of "they all look the same to me guvnor?"

Such research. And they are the "experts" on "international fascism." As a Mr. F. Christmas might intone: "ho ho ho."

It's ages since I had such a good laugh. It reminded me of a piece in Searchlies years ago about the ITP which linked much of the above alongside Baltic nationalists, SS veterans, the IRA, the UDA, "violent" Pro-Lifers, skinheads, neo-nazis, British monarchists, and many others too. It was quite the roll call.

Dere wuz Nazis, priests, Vichy dudes, 911 deniers...

And they call us conspiracy theorists!

Anyhow, in the intro to this latest piece of drivel, it of course brings up the fact that the meeting/convention/conspiracy in question was held on Remembrance Sunday and how nationalists (sorry, "nazis") had for years "desecrated" Remembrance Sunday by marching to the cenotaph.

Now there a number of things here, not least the "freedom of speech" that we are supposed to have fought for. But think of the Stalinists/Communists and extreme Zionists that make up Searchlies, with their roots in the gangland sleazy underbelly of London's Soho and their hardline Stalinist cadre for many years. Democrats? Hmmm.

The writer John Mortimer QC, who was the creator of Rumpole of the Bailey, was giving a talk on his life to an audience, recorded for the radio, and in that he admitted that he, the only son of a barrister and public schoolboy at Harrow naturally became a member of the Communist Party (CP). He received letters from the 'Central Committee' of the CP - he joked that he was a "one man cell" at Harrow.

This was at the start of WW2, when Germany and Russia had signed a peace treaty, and so the letters Mortimer was receiving told him to "go slow" on production for the war. So the Communists were putting out the line that this was not a war they could in any way support.

This same fact is exposed in the autobiography I Believed by Douglas Hyde, who worked at the very highest levels of the CP, its inner sanctum if you will. He said that there was rank hypocrisy because the CP was arranging a "go slow" in 1940 and thereabouts and condemning Britain's war as a Capitalist war, whereas post June 1941 they completely changed tune.

Mortimer said that after June '41 he received the same letters from the CP asking him to urge flat-out production for the war effort. Of course he wasn't in a position to do much from the opulent halls of Harrow.

The Jewish author Arthur Koestler (who wrote The Thirteenth Tribe, detailing how most Jews were latter converts, and had no relation to Biblical Jewry) dealt with this in his (anti-nazi) book Scum of the Earth in which he attacked the CP in France. Interestingly although it was written in the Spring of 1941, the book was published after Operation Barbarossa started and the CP did a swift about-turn. Koestler stood by what he had written. The pacifists and saboteurs became war-mongers and factory cheerleaders.

Of course Communists (like Searchlies) prefer to ignore this, just as they and Capitalists prefer to forget the the Soviet Union invaded Poland on September 17th, 1939.

I have always wondered why Britain and France declared war on Germany just a few days after their invasion of Poland, yet they took no such action when the Soviet Union invaded and occupied the Eastern half of Poland (and the Baltic States).

Indeed, whilst fascists were rounded up and interned (in a concentration camp) in 1940 no such action was taken against the CP which was still free to mail-out to its members, asking them to "go slow" on war production. Some suggest that hardline Communists may even have sabotaged war production in order to help the USSR's then ally, 'Nazi' Germany. Why? Why did Soviet Russia and its acolytes abroad have such a charmed existence after it invaded Poland in 1939?

So the next time Searchlies witter on about "nazis" defiling the cenotaph, someone might ask them why Stalinists like them changed sides, and went from undermining the war effort to becoming "super patriots?" We might also ask why the Zionists at Searchlies pretend to salute the British Army for being the defenders of democracy, when Searchlies' comrades in Palestine were blowing up British servicemen and civilians in terror attacks in the 1940s. They even booby-trapped the bodies of dead soldiers in order to kill more, and so achieve their dream of a Jewish state on the graves of Brits and Arabs.

If that isn't good enough, ask the Reds who witter on about the cenotaph if they remember the dead killed fighting Communism in Korea? Or don't they include the Korean War dead when they talk of the cenotaph as a "sacred" place?

Douglas Hyde saw through the lies and spin of the CP in 1941 and left the CP.

John Mortimer QC saw through the lies and spin of the CP in 1941 and left the CP.

The only time the kooks at Searchlies ever left the CP was when the CP turned against their precious Israel. The Searchlies crew preferred hardline Zionism to hardline Communism, only to return to the Red Flag when hardline Reds (or those they could find) also accepted Zionism.

One wonders if they will oppose war with Iran, as so many Socialists seem likely to do, or urge it on as so many Zionists already are. Could it be that as with Searchlies so many internecine squabbles with their would-be allies in the left-wing and anti-racist ranks in the past, Searchlies will give first preference to Israel and that cause. Who knows... they may even condemn some fellow lefties as being "anti-Semites" as they did against Norwegian Communists just a few years back when they realised that top level bankers and the Neo Cons pushing war were of a certain type.

Indeed one may wonder that when they day comes that British soldiers stop being the cannon fodder of America's Israel lobby, how much longer Searchlies will treat the cenotaph as a Holy place which only the people they deem worthy should visit?

As FC exposed years ago, the people at Searchlies, the "defenders of democracy" are just as much hypocrites as the CP of the 1940s. They have included pimps, burglars, arsonists, extremist Reds, hardline Zionists and much more in their own ranks!

And when you see the conspiracies they dream up... it's a wonder anyone takes them seriously, at all.

How Will America Create War with Iran? A Scenario

Food for thought.

Nationalists must not be conned by Zionist warmongers.

Change We Can't Believe in!

This says it all!

Thanks to News From Atlantis

Not so much "Yes We Can" as Yes They Have (Again).

Mission Accomplished!

"We've done Iraqistan, Afghanland... onto Irania!

"For democracy, Lehmans and illegal settlements!"

George Dubya.

Loyal to Whom? MP Attacked for Asking Fox/Werritty Questions

Paul Flynn MP is in trouble.

He has been central in asking why Fox, Werritty, Ambassador Gould and others met Israeli secret services in secret meetings, not covered by (top civil servant) Sir Gus O'Donnell's investigation into the Fox/Werritty affair, which picked just a couple of other less embarrassing meetings to look into.

The worry is that the Neo Cons, Fox and Werritty, with the Zionist Gould, were pushing behind the scenes for war with Iran and/or giving assurances to Israelis they had no right to give, re. attacks on Iran.

Just recently we've heard of explosions in Iran, which it is being hinted that "external forces" are behind. Given that the UK has invaded and changed government in Iran quite a few times (e.g. in 1940 - a war crime if Germany had done it), and that we are making noises against Iranian nuclear power aspirations, it is little wonder that Iranians attacked the British embassy.

Imagine if Iran had changed our government a few times, had illegally invaded us, had invaded our neighbours (either side) in the last decade and was now backing a terror state [Israel] (which holds illegal nukes) when it makes noises about bombing our sovereign soil?

Wouldn't we be more than a little peeved?

Yet because we are a "democracy" (in which we get to pick from Masondee and Masondum, choreographed by an oligarch media, in which 30% of the 30% who vote - work that out! - choose the government, and even then it breaks down to a few key marginals) we think we have the right to interfere with, attack and invade whoever doesn't do as we say (and no, democracy doesn't come into it as even by our warped standards, Saudi Arabia is a worse offender than Iran, and Iran treats all its subjects fairly, whereas Israel treats an ethnic group as virtual criminals).

So when an Ambassador is caught with his political trousers down in the Werrity/Fox Neo Con scandal (which involved a lot of Israeli money finding its way into their Atlantic Bridge grouping), why shouldn't an MP be free to ask questions without the old canard of "anti-Semitism" being thrown.

It is a scare tactic designed to silence all criticism, especially used against those who are not "anti-Jewish" but simply want answers when it comes to Zionist and Neo Con shenanigans which are trying to tip us into yet another needless and unwanted war, for Israeli interests.

Link:
Paul Flynn Accused of Anti-Semitism

EDL = Zionism, Jewish Lobby and Israeli Firsters

A picture paints a thousand words.

No argument. No debate.

The EDL are Zionist.

Nationalists. Patriots. Pay attention.

The BNP sold out on Zionism and it went downhill all the way - because betrayal begets betrayal.

Have no truck with the groups who softsoap, excuse or turn a blind eye to Israel and its crimes.

Journalists in Sarkozy's Israeli Comments Conspiracy

NB: Journalists agreed not to report this. That is a CONSPIRACY.

Sarkozy to Obama: Netanyahu a Liar

Watch this great video.

The voice watching the TV and making comments is that "voice of moderation" we all so rarely really hear: a full-blooded Zionist.

And boy oh boy is he angry.

Obama is toast as far as this Israeli-Firster is concerned. And if the chosenites and their followers think this in America, you can be sure they do in Israel too.

It's funny really because if the President of France weren't Jewish, and if the Israeli journalist who broke this weren't Jewish they would be a cacophony of "Anti-Semitism" -- and this despite the fact that the French media (according to BBC reports) agree to cover-up the remarks - obviously thinking to their masters' bidding.

The whole world knows that Israel is a terrorist state and the whole Israeli machinery is based on lies. But for us (mere goys that we are) to hear that world leaders know this too has broken all the taboos of the modern media.

You will note on this video that the Israeli-Firster gets all personal about Obama ("Muslim") and yet Sarkozy, the Jewish President of France who made the comment, escapes his approbation.

Oooooooh. Jewish racism?

Libyan Patriots Fight Back in Tripoli Against the Terrorists

A "NTC" rocket launcher being used against Sirte civilians

So "Gadaffy Loyalists" (not "brave Libyan Resistance fighters defending civilians from roving gangs of terrorists intent on rape, beatings and looting") are fighting back in Tripoli.

After "the West" told us all it was super-safe, and everyone except Lady Gaga had made whistle stop tours there (usually only to the inside of some nondescript building that could have been in Slough!).

Don't believe the lies of the media:

• NATO were not "protecting civilians" or else they would not be bombing civilian areas.
• NATO forces HAVE been on the ground killing and maiming.
• The Rebels have committed atrocities against civilians, including rapes in Tripoli.
• And much worse will probably come out in the weeks, months and years ahead.
• Is going house to house in Tripoli and Sirte any different from Benghazi - used an excuse to drag us into the conflict?

We should not be taking sides in a Libyan conflict.
We should not be enforcing Rothschild-backed regime change.
Nationalists should back the anti-usury Green revolution, whatever its minor failings.

Gadaffy's Green Book may not be pitch perfect for us, but it is a Libyan solution to Libyan problems and as much as it is based on the Fascist Corporatist/Medieval Christian Guild structures as espoused by Nationalists from the 19th Century to WW2 and beyond, we should give it our support and learn from its positive lessons and its mistakes.

Interestingly, one of the few outlets for some truth in all this - Press TV - is, so it is being Tweeted, being attacked by 'Ofcom' (the communications watchdog) and could well be taken off Sky satellite/digital TV. their reports clearly have the British State and its Zionist backers worried.

It is up to Nationalists to spread the truth about these world events, even if inbred, deadbeat morons in the BNP say we are "muzzie lovers" (as they did to FC when we were forthright in defending the Palestinian cause). The cheap labels thrown by those so keen to take the shekels of the enemy mean nothing to us Third Positionists.

Who are the Zionist Front Group? EDL or BNP? or Both?

In recent months the BNP leader has attacked the English Defence League as a Zionist front-group.

To be fair, the EDL is pro-Zionist. Yet so is the BNP as these choice quotes make clear:

Don't forget Griffin used his biggest nationwide media opportunity on the BBC's Question Time to promote the BNP as the one party that had given Israel unequivocal support in its assault on Gaza, Operation Cast Lead:
"There are Nazis in Britain and they loathe me because I have brought the BNP from being frankly an anti-Semitic and racist organisation into being the only political party which in the clashes between Israel and Gaza stood full-square behind Israel’s right to deal with Hamas terrorists."

Lee Barnes (in his days as a BNP legal representative and columnist) wrote on the BNP website:
"As a Nationalist I can say that I support Israel 100 % in their dispute with Hezbollah. In fact, I hope they wipe Hezbollah off the Lebanese map and bomb them until they leave large greasy craters in the cities where their Islamic extremist cantons of terror once stood."

-- as posted by "retread" on the British Democracy Forum.

Ipso facto, the BNP calling the EDL Zionist is more than a little silly. Is the BNP trying to reassure its grass roots (door closed, horse bolted) or merely trying to undermine the credibility of the EDL?

More Than Taboo: Emotional Blackmail Used to Justify Dubious Wars

Those promoting the pro-Israel, quasi-Neo Con line or "it's all the Muslims" lines in Nationalism must be ostracised.

One doesn't haven't to appreciate all this bloke's lines to see there is something wrong. In fact it is a shame he overlooks the fact that even religiously, given the Incarnation of Jesus Christ (after all, we are supposed to be a Christian country), the "right" of Jews to Palestine is negated: The New Covenant is between Christ and His Church, not the Jews who rejected Christ; and especially not those who converted to Judaism hundreds of years after Christ died.

Food for thought...

BTW - why aren't we, in the school system, ever told of the numbers of millions of Christian Russians, Ukrainians, Balts etc, who were killed in the gulags or via forced starvation by the Communists? is it because they were European Christians? Is it because Communists are still involved in politics and education? Is it because the Communist regime was run by a certain Jewish faction (as detailed by Churchill- hardly a "nazi")?

There does seem an inverse racism at play.

Millions were killed in Rwanda in a terrible tribal conflict, yet we still "worry" about one group in a conflict 60 years ago in which so many peoples suffered (not least the Germans and Russians). What do you think Africans make of that?

Israel: Exporting Terrorism

Mossad killed Iranian scientist, Der Spiegel reports

August 2, 2011

JERUSALEM (JTA) -- Israel is responsible for the assassination last week of an Iranian nuclear scientist, the German newspaper Der Spiegel reported.

The assassination of Darioush Rezaei is the first "serious action" taken by new Mossad chief Tamir Pardo, an unnamed Israeli source told the news outlet, according to an article published on the newspaper's website Tuesday.

Rezaei, who worked at a nuclear research center in northern Tehran, is the third Iranian nuclear physicist who has been assassinated in the past 20 months.

The killings are part of a campaign to sabotage, or at least slow down, Iran's nuclear program, Der Spiegel reported, citing unnamed sources in Israeli intelligence.

The report also cited its military source as saying that the calls for bombing Iran are increasing, especially from Israeli Air Force officers.

Iranian media first identified the victim of last week's assassination as Rezaei, who worked on the development of switches for a nuclear bomb, then amended its identification to name graduate student Dariush Rezaeinejad. Der Spiegel asserts that the victim was indeed Rezaei, who has not been seen since the attack.

Two attackers shot Rezaei in the throat, the magazine said, before fleeing on a motorcycle.

Link:

JTA

Zionists Blame Anti-Zionist Utoya Labour Youth for their own Deaths! Pet Media Keep Quiet

A Conspiracy by the Zionists!!! Norway = Nazis

The Zionists/Neo Cons are now blaming the Norwegian Labour Party youth for their own deaths!

Yes, just like the Palestinians are to blame for having their land stolen, for having their wells poisoned, for being cut off from their water supplies, for being killed by the thousand...

They are now saying that the Norwegian Labour Party youth decided to support the Palestinians (or "Hamas terrorists" in their lingo) so they (basically!) got what they deserved.

Don't believe me? Go see for yourself: Evil Zionism...

Oh the evil! They flew Palestinian flags even. Death to them!

Can you believe it? The Zionists even say the old Swastika is now the new Norway flag. And to them because the anti-Zionist Labour Party is in power in Norway and already said it would recognise the Palestinian State, they become a "legitimate target" for another false flag operation which (like Bologna, Carpentras etc.) can be blamed on "right wing extremists."

So what does "our" mass media make of this? Jewish and Zionist extremists gloating over the deaths of innocents? Is it on the front pages? or even the inside pages?Any columnists brave enough?

Erm... no.

Controlled media? Conspiracy? You bet!

And this, dear reader, is why the BNP, EDL, and all the other civic patriot (read: blacks are british -- all lower case, we don't want to frighten anyone) groups were playing a dangerous game when they started making Israel-friendly noises, when they started grubbing for Jewish votes, and cultivating a certain breed of media columnists.

You get friendly with Israel and you get your fingers burnt! Look at America - endless wars, in debt up to the gills, state secrets stolen by Zionist spy-rings, the USS Liberty incident (look it up!), and Israel probably even has a section of its illegally held nukes in the Negev Dessert pointing at its ally!

Israel is a terrorist state. It will strike out at its enemies, and its friends - by fair means or foul. It will use terror, subterfuge, blackmail, corruption - you name it. The Norwegians are just the latest in a long line of victims of Zionist terror for daring to oppose Israeli terrorism.

If we really want to show solidarity with the Norwegians (as the mass media suggests we should) then we should oppose Israel and the Zionist agenda with every fibre of our being.

Yet our Zionist-led media is already twisting events, so we are lied to and half-truths are spun, so that to show solidarity we're all supposed to hug an immigrant, and celebrate the (Zionist imposed) race laws which enforce "equality."

Talk about not seeing the wood for the trees!

Viagra in Libya? Kuwaiti Incubators and Belgian Babies on Bayonets!

Oh yes - Libya and especially Hitler, sorry I mean Gaddafi, is using rape as a tactic.

Of course they are. Mind you that didn't stop us being allies with the Red Army as they raped their way across Europe. When Socialists uphold WW2 as a fight for democracy and freedom, they mean for rape, murder, slavery and the Almighty Dollar.

But I digress.

This story has all the hallmarks of black propaganda and war propaganda. remember the Belgian babies thrown in the air onto German bayonets in WW1? Or the babies turfed out of Kuwaiti incubators by Saddam's stormtroopers?

All fiction. 30 years from now they will look back and laugh at the idea of Gaddafi giving his troops Viagra!

Mind you, many people still haven't seen through the war propaganda of the Holocau$t.

And guess who has been sending Amnesty International reports over the Internet about Libya, rape, Gaddafi and Viagra?

Lefty Zionist and Neo Con apologist David Aaronovitch! The man who acted as cheerleader to the left for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; the man who stays strangely quiet when Israel massacres innocents; and the man who asked FC for "the source" of Israel being behind the Stuxnet Virus that put the Fukushima into meltdown - and when presented with it stayed incredibly quiet.

And let's not forget it was Aaronovitch the arch-Zionist whom Nick Griffin boasted to, that he was going to turn the BNP around, just before he made the BNP all pro-Israeli and purely 'bash the Muslims' becoming the right-wing Neo Con voice.

And so the enemies of civilisation had all bases covered. They had their normal allies the right-wing Tories banging the war drum. They had New Labour (creation of ex-Commie Mandleson) banging the war drum. They had Lefty Aaronovitch beating the war drum to the lefties; and then they had Griffin's BNP painting all the world's ills on 'the muzzies' so working class whites would tend to be more pro-war (the BNP favoured the Afghan war at first).

We have all been stitched up by the usual oligarchs, media moguls, banksters and vested interests.

So don't believe the hype about Libyan Viagra. The headline makers need this crap to justify another pointless war to the sheeple. And while your schools, hospitals,libraries, parks and other amenities are cut back, closed or crumble, remember that guided missiles cost circa £1 Million a time.

Cui Bono. (Translated: Ask Bono why he tax-dodges)