Who Remembers the Other Millions Who Died?

Who Remembers the Millions KIlled by Talmudic Reds?

Remembrance Day has been and gone. Do the Socialists remember those dead who died in the Korean War fighting Communism? Do we think that WW1 was fought "for freedom"? Or that Iraq and Afghanistan were worth the losses, all for a Neo-Con fantasy?

Next up is Holocaust Day in January. We were sold this political event on the grounds it would remember all genocides. Really?

• Who remembers the Ukrainian Christians and Nationalists forcibly starved by the Communists circa 1933?
• Who remembers the Irish forcibly starved by the British State circa 1845?
• Who remembers the Bengalis forcibly starved by the British State circa 1943?
• Then there's the Armenians (the first Christian nation), robbed of their statehood and massacred by Turks.
• Then there's the Palestinians, robbed of statehood, exiled, put in camps etc.

All told these peoples vastly outnumber the "6 Million Jews" - the same figure Zionists said were being massacred, we should always remember, at the time in news reports during WW1.

Let's not forget the hundreds of thousands of Germans who died in criminal Allied Firestorms, nor the PoWs deliberately starved in 1945-46.

But hey, don't worry you Ukrainians, Irish, Bengalis, Armenians, Germans and Palestinians - we can all have yet another pantomime based on the Holohoax as the collection tin for B'nai B'rith is passed around. It seems your innocent dead don't count because they are gentile... How many Hollywood films about your dead are there? How many history lessons in schools? How many museum exhibits? How many govt organised memorial days? And how many laws making discussing the facts of their deaths an actual crime?

Ukrainians, Irish, Bengalis, Armenians, Germans and Palestinians: second class one and all!



P.S. If you are in any doubt as to the disdain you are held, think of the Poles who died at Auschwitz. Not only did they lose their freedom in 1945 to one of the countries that invaded them in September 1939 (which brings into doubt the whole ethos of WW2), but when Carmelite nuns erected Crosses at the site of their death, militant Zionist Jews poured vessels of urine over them. The latter demanded that the Crosses be taken down. Not even the dead of Auschwitz count... if they are not "chosen."


Links:
Bengal 1943/44 - The Forgotten Holocaust Killed Millions
Ukraine 1933 - Atheist Reds Organise Mass Starvation
Ireland 1845 - Free Trade Dogma of UK Means Millions Die

India for the Indians: Guardianistas' Immigration Lies

How interesting that the usual rent-an-opinion lefties were scattered across the media yesterday to condemn Britain's proposed "racist" cap on immigration at a time when 'Call me Dave' Cameron is in India trying to whip up trade between India and Britain.

'How can we trade with India as partners and equals when we won't let them into the UK?' was the clarion cry of the Guardianistas from the verandas of their town-houses in suspiciously white suburbs dotted around the country.

As usual, dear reader, they are way off.

India positively dissuades Brits from going to India (justly so after 200 years of colonial rule you might say) putting up all manner of visa barriers.

It is obvious that India does not want thousands (let alone millions!) of Whites travelling there to settle: and that is their right! They should not feel like racists, protectionists or little Hitlers for protecting their borders.

Neither should we for protecting ours: and a damn sight more Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis etc. will flood into Britain next year than English, Scots etc. will move to India!

As usual the Guardianistas have an axe to grind. Anything short of open borders to them is "racist" because, you see, they employ immigrants as nannies and au pairs, and they go to foreign restaurants and they even say hello to Mr. Gupta in the corner shop once a month and smile to the little ethnic man through the glass at the petrol station.

Let's not mention the fact that they jump through hoops, pretend to be Christians (even Catholics!) and even pay through the nose to get their children (Marmaduke and Olivia) out of the local Comprehensive school that is primarily Third World.

If they are so "inclusive" why don't they send their own children to a school full of Asians, Somalians, Kurds, Albanians etc.?

For that brand of people you see dear reader, they like to sit in their large properties in their suspiciously white area (are you reading this Billy Bragg?) busily telling the rest of us how great immigration is and how it "benefits" us all to have hundreds of thousands flooding in to go straight on housing benefit, working tax credit, free education and free healthcare.

There is nothing wrong per se in Slick Dave going to India to improve trade (leaving aside that most of the trade will be big business and even arms, and the lack of social policy in India that means the poor being used on terrible wages and conditions), but why do the Champagne Socialists line up to condemn the UK's apology for immigration controls and/or policy when India no more wants Brits flooding into their country than we want Indians flooding in here.

What the Guardianistas fail to understand is that nationalism and seeking to protect your land, communities and identity is as natural for the average man in London as it is for the average man in Delhi.

Colonialism is looked back with bad feeling for the Indians. Why don't the Guardianistas understand that we are being colonised by Third Worlders and this is just as wrong.

When I was in school (just before the Industrial Revolution) I remember having an argument with a lefty teacher who had a poster with Third World faces proclaiming "we are here because you were there."

I told her: 1. I had never been there; 2. Two wrongs don't make a right.

The Indians have the right to run their own country, to be free from alien control, and to set their own immigration controls - however strictly.

So should we.

From the East India Company to the Afghan War

In my travels I tend to bump into a wide variety of people with past histories and experiences far beyond my sheltered, mono-cultural, comprehensive school, working class upbringing.

If I get the chance I always try and engage these people in conversation to to try learn something else about their job, background, culture etc.

Some lookers-in will cry "hypocrite" because I take an interest in such things whilst publishing "white power" material.

Not so, dear reader. If we want to defend the rights of European peoples, cultures, traditions etc. do we not also want to preserve those of other peoples?

What we are opposed to is the multi-culti anti-culture that comes mostly from 'American' big business giants, and the multi-racial miscegenation, both of which destroy all peoples and cultures via a Chinese water torture style of erosion of peoples, races, cultures, traditions etc.

I am not ignorant, nor am I hateful. I want to know more about different peoples and cultures, because then I learn to appreciated the differences and the idiosyncrasies of my own culture, people, tradition and race.

It is the multiculturalists who want to destroy our differences and make us all coffee coloured automatons wearing Man Utd tops, swilling X-Brand Cola and eating Americanised junk food.

To them we are all just walking wallets who, as long as we can buy the latest Nike top, it is irrelevant what we are, who we are, what blood runs in our veins, etc. etc.

And the truly ignorant are those who always talk of the "benefits" of mass immigration when they do not live amongst the immigrants, have not had their community destroyed, and ignore the destruction of our traditions, cultures and more.

At work the other day I put iplayer on in the background and listened to John Sergeant explaining about the railways built by the British Empire in India, and it made quite a few chance meetings and shared stories come flooding back.

One lady I met ran an English school in India and it was fascinating to learn from her all about the India languages and the central role of English as the 'lingua franca' of the subcontinent. She also impressed on me how the children there, although superficially poorer than those of Europe, were far happier in themselves. As any parent knows, this can quickly become a cliché when used against one's own children and most of us can probably remember our own parents saying too whenever we demanded a certain item for a birthday or for Christmas.

The unifying nature of the English language is a strange product of the British Empire. This is something I took up with another gent I spoke to as we hurtled along Britain's railway system. I also asked him if, in his opinion as someone who came from the very south of India, the British had united the various Indian kingdoms. He was quite shocked and answered that far from it, Britain had actually split India.

It was his view that India comprised of all the lands that currently include Bangladesh, Pakistan and India, and that by partitioning India the British had forever damaged India. He likened it to Ireland where historically the chieftains and tribes were always warring, even to the extent of inviting in the English to win their rival wars. Yet, he insisted, like the Indians they remained intrinsically Irish despite their regional differences, until partition.

I must admit this made me think as I had always thought the British had unified India, albeit for profit under the East India Company.

Of course, when it comes to history (and in this respect I suppose India again is like Ireland) the definition of what happened will very much depend on who you listen to, just as when you put two economists in a room you are bound to get three different versions of what will happen next!

Another interesting aspect of Indian and British history I learnt from an ex-British consulate worker, of all people. He had been based in India for some years and during a general talk about the Raj and its impact on all aspects of Indian life I mentioned the fact that India was particularly known for being Hindu (and Pakistan, Muslim) and how I was surprised India wasn't Anglican in the way many African ex-colonies were, and he told me that the East Indian Company actually banned missionaries, because they got in the way of trade too much!

This seemed to contradict much of what we are taught about British Imperialism in our schools, and seems to point to money and control being more important to the powers-that-be than Christianity.

The ex-bureaucrat said that bar a small 'crescent' in the north (he did name the areas, but I know so little of India I didn't even try to memorise them) which was penetrated by Protestant missionaries such as Methodists, the Christian religion of India was in reality Catholicism. We then talked about the Portuguese and other European settlements in India and the long impact they had. he said that some Catholic areas in India pre-date the European arrival and many Indians claim their religion back to the arrival of the Apostle, Thomas.

In one of his letters, dealing with the European 'trading posts' in India, for example St Francis Xavier said that more Indians would be Christian if the behaviour of the Portuguese traders, sailors and settlers gave a better example of Christian life! I guess nothing changes, as Gandhi said much the same, several hundred years later.

Did their search for wealth mean the British Imperial forces missed a chance to create a Christian country in the East which would act as a buffer to Islam, in the way that Spanish Conquistadors created solidly Catholic countries throughout South and Central America? Might India's Christianity even have spread to modern Pakistan and other states?

I told the bureaucrat of the example of Japan which was on the verge of becoming a Catholic country, with the regent about to convert, when British and Dutch traders persuaded the royal family that there was a "plot" afoot to betray Japan to 'foreign powers.'

The "Christian" traders had the Japanese put Crosses outside entrances to towns and anyone who refused to spit on them was condemned. Many Christians (Japanese and European) were brutally tortured and many had their feet cut off. All this because of the lies of some jealous merchants, Christian in name only. A Catholic Japan might have meant a world of difference, which the men tortured in WW2 prisoner camps might only wonder about.

This was another example of when our own kith and kin - in search of the 'almighty dollar' stopped the spread of Christianity, for shallow short term benefit.

World history may have been very different.

Perhaps we shouldn't be so surprised.

The flag of the East India Company became the early flag of the British American Colonies, only to transmogrify into the USA's Star and Stripes.

The policy of the East India Company stopped Indians becoming Christian. The policies of American big business and military make many other peoples around the world hate us (because they see them as Christians).

So whether today or hundreds of years ago, the international merchants are shafting us all, and putting money before actions that could make others think more kindly of us and our creed; which in turn might enable the Indians to be at ease in India, the Afghans in Afghanistan, Pakistanis in Pakistan and, in turn the Europeans peoples at ease in their own nations.

Dr. Saunders Lewis said that true nationalism was not about barbed wire borders, but about identity. He said that nations felt truly free under the common soil of Christendom. This is a message that other nationalists (such as G.K. Chesterton and Belloc) have spread.

These and many other nationalists promoted an anti-chauvinist, anti-parochial form of genuine nationalism that saw each people as equally valid.

Chesterton said that nationalists respected their neighbours whereas Imperialists wanted to conquer them.

In the Imperial age when the 'imperial dream' seemed the norm (despite the misgivings of some of the means if not the ends) some opportunities were woefully missed because of the greed of the international big businessmen.

In an age when the new Imperialists are fighting their illegal wars and the new international big businessmen are egging the military machine on so they can make more money, we nationalists must be seen to put forward the best for our own people, but also respect the nationhood and rights of other peoples.

If we start to act like Christian people -- as both St Francis Xavier and Gandhi attested! -- others may well learn to respect us as they haven't before.

If we continue to bully others (on the coat-tails of America) because their education policy, foreign policy or trading partners are not ours, then we will continue to be the enemy of many, which does us no favours at all.

If we behave in a civilised manner (at home and abroad) then we can build alliances, trade, understanding with peoples and nations across the globe, and seek to influence others, whilst insisting on our own rights. At the moment we just look like cowards and charlatans who do whatever America and Israel ask.

WILL PRINCE HARRY BE "RACIALLY AWARE?"

Right: So much to learn... Prince Harry scowls at the prospect?

How comforting for those of us who have seen millions of non-Europeans flood into this country - without a mandate from the people! - in the belief that they could stay here and colonise our nation (I was taught in my inner city comprehensive school by a CND-badge wearing suspiciously hairy feminist teacher that Colonialism was wrong...) - that prince Harry has been sent on a Racial Awareness course!

It's about time someone in the upper echelons of the nation - royalty being better than nothing! - is going to be taught how essential it is that this country should be White, European and Christian!

What a breath of fresh air that his parents are instilling a form of folk-pride and self-awareness of his heritage in this day and age when anyone who promotes awareness of anything remotely White is accused of (crime of the decade!) "extremism" or (even worse... ta da:) "racism."

I think all our representatives, royalty and anyone in the public eye should be sent on racial awareness courses!

Some might call it brain-washing, but if our wonderfully democratic government have given the green light for such things, what have we got to be nervous of?

So come on Prince Harry! Stop being an alcohol-led clown and weekend quasi "racist" -- get on that course and learn about the vast European, Christian and White roots of this land, of the culture that nurtured our forefathers, of the blood that flows in our veins.

Racial Awareness Courses!

Phew.

Just when I thought we were lost in a sea of multi-culti madness forever.


P.S.

A colleague sent this email onto me:

Apparently England's biggest St George's Day parade is facing the axe, because (according to Labour Councillor Yvonne Davies) "It is not only the parade which is the problem, but the tribal excitement it creates."

England's National Day causes "tribal excitement"???? Can you imaging any politician daring to use such language about the Notting Hill Mugging Fest, ooops sorry, Carnival?

Yvonne Davies, said the parade created an "unhealthy atmosphere" and inspired young boys to be racist. (Translation from ZaNuLabour speak: the parade celebrates English patriotism and makes our kids aware of their precious heritage, for which their grandfathers and great-grandfathers had fought and died to protect).

Councillor Davies wrote in: "I am sure most are very respectful and law-abiding, however some are distasteful in the extreme and wish to divide and separate people from each other."

Hmmm.

Is it distasteful to celebrate England's national Saint? Isn't it rather a celebration of all things English, Christian and historical?

We know the Irish celebrate their heritage, nationhood, language and Christian culture in Ireland and across the world.

We know the Welsh celebrate their heritage, nationhood, language and Christian culture in Wales via St David's Day celebrations and Eisteddfods.

So why not the English?

Asian celebrations like Diwali are promoted. African festivals are promoted. Even homosexual festivals are bank-rolled by big business and councils.

The problem the Labourites have is that this festival is English, Christian and therefore "divisive."

It is high time the people of England fought for their rights, just as the Irish and Welsh had to many decades ago to enshrine their rights, gain even the vestige of nationhood, fight repressive anti-indigenous laws, and raise their own national flags!

It's now time for the English to realise that if they do not fight for their rights in the same sense then their nationhood will be lost to a miasma of secular, multi-culti "Wintervals" and Big Business sponsored "ethnic" events all designed to undermine their very Englishness.

When Britain colonised India (on behalf of Big Business naturally!) it took the Indians many decades of struggle and strife to throw off the Colonial power and gain independence: India for the Indians which very few can disagree with!

Now that India, Pakistan, Africa etc. are colonising England, how many decades of struggle and strife will it take for the English to throw off these Neo-Colonial powers?

If India for the Indians is correct: how can England for the English be wrong?

Perhaps the "Racially Aware" Prince Harry will lead the charge!

"Upon this charge, cry God for England, Harry and Saint George!"

Billy Shakespeare (DoB St George's Day), Henry V

BNP Allies Marry Frogs

In its headlong rush (a la Animal Farm) to tell us "Muslim Bad, Jews and Others Good" the BNP has tried to make allies with some pretty rum people.

This has included Hindus and Sikhs (and Christian/Secular West Indians) in Britain. They would have us believe that these people pose no threat to us and are simply "salt in the soup" and an asset to multi-culti Britain.

Remember the Negro Zimbabwean son-in-law of a BNP official in Cumbria was a "patriotic Briton" (pictured right in the BNP's party newspaper).

Hmm.

In their rush to make anti-Muslim allies, they have been keen to overlook the religious "foibles" of their bed-mates.

Of course we are aware of their status as "most Zionist party" according to the (Zionist!) Jewish Board of Deputies, but there's more.

At every possible opportunity the BNP loves to quote the Koran to persuade us what an "evil and wicked religion" it is.

Yet it is strangely silent when it comes to the sheer anti-Christian hatred of the Jewish Talmud, the bizarre and discriminatory caste system of Hinduism and the melting-pot ecumenism of the Sikhs.

The BNP claims to be 'defending Christianity' but in truth it is not. It is defending secular Freemasonic humanism and multi-racialism. That is why BNP officials have even attacked those Christians who defend Creationism and don't believe in evolution.

It is no better than the system parties which have milked the blacks ops false flag operation called "911" and used the CIA/Mossad ghost operation called "Al Qaeda" to frighten people into joining their Zionist struggle.

In their headlong rush to screech "Muslim bad..." etc. they have knowingly overlooked these other alien religion which threaten our culture and heritage.

In India 7 year old children have married frogs!

Yes, frogs!

This is the sick religion called Hinduism, with its "good" and "bad" gods and goddesses, with its reincarnation and caste system which excuses the mega-rich from having to care about the slum-dwellers (who are getting their "reward" for bad former lives).

This is the bizarre cult that the "modern BNP" has allied itself with in a bid to carry out its Zionist paymasters' bidding.

Link:
Indians marry frogs!