At this point everyone has heard of rapes, acid attacks, stabbings and terror attacks but another worrying trend, which isn’t getting much attention is the recent increase of attacks on animals.
Last year on the 14th of November in Eutlingen Germany two Arab looking men(20-25) beheaded a Swan but not to eat it. They simply took the head and left the carcass. This is especially cruel if you consider that Swans mate for life! The men were overheard talking about wanting to kill one of the majestic animals by a witness.
On the 11th of February a Syrian threw a dog out of the third floor window because it annoyed him simply by being there. Even after all the medical measures were taken the dog died.
Germany however is not the only country experiencing worrying attacks on animals like this. In Austria, a pony was cut open on the field with a blade and before that alpacas and dogs were poisoned. Another attack with a knife on a dog took place just this week in Austria. The dog was probably only saved by the owner running out of the house to help it and take it to the vet.
A woman in Switzerland wasn’t so fortunate and lost all three of her dogs to treats that had razor blades and poison mixed into them. In all of these cases the perpetrators remain unknown for now.
Of course there have been attacks on animals before but nothing of the sort, that even zoo animals are no longer safe. A truly disturbing case took place in a petting zoo in Berlin. A Syrian man (23) was caught rapping a pony and noticed by other visitors with their children. He was only reported to police and given a ban from entering the zoo again.
Two especially cruel attacks on sheep in a petting zoo took place in Berlin. Two sheep were thrown over the fence and a pregnant animal was butchered. The other animal was injured and survived. Sadly this week it happened again. However this time two Romanians (29) were caught red-handed with a bloody knife and one of the sheep’s legs in their bag. It remains to be seen if they are also responsible for the previously butchered animal.
Some of these attacks may well have been carried out by native animal haters as there is no proof to the contrary. Nonetheless the attacks on the zoo animals and even the rape of a pony pose a worrying question. Might this be just another side effect of open borders, which we will be told we have to live with?
#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" target="_blank">
Read full article: Migrant Crisis: Animals Are No Longer Safe in Europe!.
Cyril Ramaphosa, the newly elected president of South Africa, has stated he will begin the process of expropriation of farmland from white South African farmers without compensation, and then redistribute the land to black South Africans. Could these policies spell disaster for the South African economy?
Cyril Ramaphosa vows to ‘return’ land to black South Africans. Cyril Ramaphosa, leader of South Africa’s ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC), and newly elected president, has promised to confiscate lands that have been owned by white farmers since the 1600s and “return” it to the black citizens of the country.
Last Thursday, Ramaphosa assumed office after the scandal afflicted Jacob Zuma resigned following years of corruption allegations and incompetence. Ramaphosa was the only candidate nominated during the South African Parliament session.
Ramaphosa’s ascent to power marks a turning point for South Africa, after the slow demise of the illustrious ruling party under Jacob Zuma.
Cyril Ramaphosa speech reveals land redistribution plans. In the speech, Ramaphosa stated:“The expropriation of land without compensation is envisaged as one of the measures that we will use to accelerate the redistribution of land to black South Africans.”
Following his state-of-the-nation address, supporters of Ramaphosa sang and danced outside the National Assembly building, while members of the opposition party, the Economic Freedom Fighters, stormed out of the chamber in protest.
The newly elected South African president promised that this drastic move wouldn’t damage either the country’s agriculture or economy. Unfortunately, an outcome as good as this is highly doubtful. Robert Mugabe’s land reform crippled Zimbabwe economy.
In an effort to right similar colonial and Apartheid-era injustices that existed in Zimbabwe, President Robert Mugabe initiated a land redistribution agenda in 1999 to 2000. Thousands of farms owned by white people were commandeered by the Zimbabwe government, and the farmers were involuntarily removed from their land.
Prior to these farmers being removed from their land, Zimbabwe was known as the breadbasket of southern Africa. The country was home to world-class farmers who played an integral role in providing food for the rest of the region.
Unfortunately, within just a couple years of Mugabe’s “land redistribution” efforts, food production in the country came to a standstill. Without its adept farmers stewarding over the land, Zimbabwe went from being an agricultural export powerhouse to having to rely on handouts from the United Nations’ World Food Program.
What followed was hyperinflation along with a multi-decade depression. Land redistribution destined to fail.
One would think that politicians in neighbouring South Africa would take notice of the grave consequences Zimbabwe had to endure as a result of Mugabe’s failed policies and take measures themselves to avoid going down the same road.
South Africa had the pleasure of witnessing first-hand the devastating effects of Mugabe’s land redistribution since these policies resulted in millions of starving Zimbabwean refugees storming across their borders. And for some reason, this is exactly the policy that they’ve chosen to adopt.
Regrettably, we live in a world where clear-cut realities and limitations exist. One of these realities is that land redistribution, even with the noblest intentions, simply does not work.
What do you think? Is South Africa bound to suffer the same fate as Zimbabwe did during 1999 to 2000?
György Schwartz, better known by his later name George Soros, is a Hungarian-born, Jewish-American billionaire, hedge fund manager, convicted felon, messianic sociopath, and open-borders globalist. He has been described as “the single most destructive Leftist demagogue in the world.” Others have characterized him as the world’s preeminent “malignant messianic narcissist.”
He was born in Budapest on August 12, 1930, to wealthy, well-educated parents Tivadar and Elizabeth Schwartz. Sometime during the 1930s, when George and his older brother Paul were still young, the Schwartzes changed their family name to Soros in order to better assimilate into the Hungarian gentile population, as anti-Semitism unremittingly spread throughout the European continent.
George Soros was only 13 years old when Adolf Eichmann, one of Hitler’s top lieutenants, arrived in Hungary to oversee and manage logistical efforts involved in the mass deportation of Hungarian Jews to ghettos and death camps in Eastern Europe.
At this time, the Soros family managed to purchase official documents stating that they were Christians. Additionally, Tivadar Soros bribed a Nazi official to allow George to pose as his Christian godson. Young George’s protector was a Nazi, whose job was to confiscate property from Hungary’s Jewish population. Fourteen-year-old Soros accompanied this official during his confiscation rounds.
Also in 1944, in just ten months’ time, 70 percent of Soros’ fellow Jews in Hungary, nearly a half-million human beings, were annihilated. All around him, Hungarian Jews were dying and disappearing. It isn’t unreasonable to infer that he knew at least some of these people personally.
During a 1998 interview with “60 Minutes,” Steve Kroft asked Soros if it had been difficult taking part in these activities. Soros promptly replied, “No, not at all.” Kroft then followed up, asking if he ever experienced feelings of guilt for having taken part in the confiscation of his Jewish neighbors’ property. Again without hesitation, Soros replied, “No, if I wasn’t the one taking it away, someone else would be there doing it anyway.”
Allegedly, George Soros has gone to some lengths to suppress this interview, and it’s not hard to see why.
In late 1944 and early 1945, the Battle of Budapest raged, with Soviet troops on one side, and Axis and Hungarian forces on the other, engaged in ferocious urban warfare throughout the city. Soros somehow managed to survive the siege, which resulted in 38,000 civilian deaths over the course of about three months.
After the war, Soros attended the prestigious London School of Economics – not only one of the best universities in Britain but also one of the top academic institutions in the world. Upon graduating with a BA and then a Ph.D., Soros went to America, where he would begin his illustrious career as a hedge fund manager.
“Well, you know, I was a human being before I became a businessman.” -George Soros
Today, George Soros is one of the most successful hedge fund managers and investors in the world. As of February 2018, after donating 18 billion dollars to his Open Society Foundations, Soros still has a personal net worth of 8 billion dollars.
Soros’ Quantum Fund, which he founded with Jim Rogers in 1973, is perhaps the most profitable hedge fund in the world. Somehow, presumably through political corruption, Soros has been able to generate an average annual return of 30 percent for investors in the Quantum Fund. It wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume this given that Quantum Fund’s trades are based almost entirely on economic and political conditions in certain markets.
Furthermore, Soros has a track record of being willing to play dirty in order to win. In 2002, he was convicted of felony insider trading in France. The court determined that he had “acted with the knowledge that the bank might be a takeover target,” according to Bloomberg. The court subsequently ordered Soros to pay 2.2 million euros in restitution.
Soros has amassed most of his vast, multibillion-dollar fortune via the morally questionable practice of global currency speculation and manipulation. He made his first billion in 1992, when he dumped $10 billion USD worth of British pounds sterling, initiating the devaluation of the currency and the UK’s subsequent financial crisis. After this move, he became known as “The Man Who Broke the Bank of England.” And he broke it across the backs of working-class Brits who instantly saw the value of their homes fall drastically and their life savings severely devalued, basically overnight. This single short sale cemented his reputation as one of the foremost currency speculators in the world.
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad accused Soros of bringing down the nation’s currency with his aggressive speculative attacks on weak currencies in Southeast Asia. Government officials in Thailand have deemed Soros an “economic war criminal” due to the integral role he played in the 1997 Asian financial crisis. Many have speculated that because of his large bet against the Thai baht, Soros helped to engineer the Asian crisis via his extensive network of political connections in the region.
“Everybody says I have a lot of power. But what does that power consist of?… Can I influence governments? I am beginning to be able to….”-George Soros
What does a billionaire atheist, with questionable moral values and a sociopath’s lack of conscience, do after they’ve made all the money they would ever personally need and more? Apparently: manipulate governments, shape the public consciousness, and influence national and international politics.
Soros spends massive amounts of money to delegitimize governments and other organizations with whom he disagrees. The multi-billionaire financier is one of the world’s largest donors to radical Leftist institutions and politicians worldwide. Over the years, Soros-funded groups have consistently attempted to undermine the nation-state worldwide. Soros would like nothing more than to see America – and all nation-states, for that matter – become subservient to international bodies like the United Nations, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund.
According to the Federal Election Commission, during the 2016 presidential campaign, Soros donated more than $9 million to pro-Clinton Super PACs – more than anyone else. This isn’t surprising considering that Clinton is a fellow globalist who’s been repeatedly shown to be corrupt to the core.
A massive hack of the far-Left billionaire’s Open Society Foundations by a group called DC Leaks revealed a memo called the “List of European Elections 2014 Projects.” The memo outlined elaborate efforts of Soros’ well-funded global network to manipulate European election outcomes. The memo details more than 90 Soros projects in Europe which sought to influence elections.
In 2011, the Media Research Center (MRC) revealed that Soros has significant ties with more than 30 news outlets in the mainstream media, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Associated Press, NBC, NPR, CBS, and ABC. At the time of the MRC report, the Soros-funded Pro-Publica’s Journalism Advisory Board featured the following prolific mainstream media “journalists”:
According to the same MRC report, the following members of the mainstream media have also been on the boards of Soros-affiliated groups:
So, George Soros bankrolls globalist politicians, pro-open borders NGOs, and prominent mainstream media figures? And dissident grassroots organizations, too? Undoubtedly.
According to an analysis of the Open Society Foundations’ tax returns that was carried out by The Washington Times, the organization funded Black Lives Matter to the tune of $33 million in one year. Prominent individuals within the law enforcement community have called for BLM to be labeled as a hate group. On July 7, 2016, a lone sniper shot and killed 5 white Dallas police officers during a Black Lives Matter protest in response to the killings of black men by police officers. An FBI intelligence report that was issued a year after the Dallas shooting was obtained by Foreign Policy magazine. The report warned that “black identity extremists” have been violently targeting police. Others have claimed that the rhetoric of Black Lives Matter leaders inspired veteran US Marine Sergeant Gavin Eugene Long to unleash a hail of bullets upon Baton Rouge police officers on July 17, 2016, leaving three officers dead and three others injured. Leaders of Black Lives Matter have continuously denied that their movement calls for violence against police.
George Soros has a long list of enemies and detractors, and rightfully so. Prominent government officials in the US, UK, Russia, Israel, Romania, Hungary, Serbia, and others have taken anti-Soros stances, some more than others. What do all these countries have in common? Simply put, they all have the pathological desire to remain sovereign nation-states and to remain in control of their own destinies.
Former UKIP leader and Brexiteer, Nigel Farage, has called for a formal inquiry into Soros after he donated £500,000 to Best for Britain, a Remain in the EU organization. Soros said that he was proud to have donated to it, claiming that it was his affection for the United Kingdom that motivated his decision.
In a FOX News interview, Farage rightly insisted that the media should concentrate on Soros’ Open Society Foundations rather than exclusively on alleged Russian interference in European and North American politics. Anyone who actually believes that George Soros cares for the wellbeing of the British people after he caused scores of them to lose their life savings, and in some cases even their homes, in 1992 is utterly naïve.
Hungary’s preeminent Euroskeptic and anti-immigration champion, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, has personally accused Soros of “trying secretly and with foreign money to influence Hungarian politics.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has joined Orbán in denouncing Soros and has endorsed the Hungarian government’s propaganda effort against him.
Last March, six American senators signed a letter urging Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s staff to examine US government funding going to Soros-backed organizations.
Poland’s ruling party, Law and Justice, led by conservative Chairman Jarosław Kaczyńsk, has accused Soros of attempting to destroy traditional societies.
Russia has actually taken the step of banning Soros’ Open Society Foundations, deeming it a security threat.
Soros has frequently stated that he sees himself as a messianic figure. “I admit that I have always harbored an exaggerated view of my self-importance – to put it bluntly, I fancied myself as some kind of god,” he said on one occasion. On another, he stated, “I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise I might end up in the loony bin.” If only we could put locking George Soros up in a loony bin to a vote.
Ask yourself, is it possible for one individual to lay the groundwork for a global financial meltdown, the radicalizing of the Leftist parties across North America and Europe, and contribute to the West’s moral decline? It is surely an exaggeration to hold Soros solely responsible for these phenomena, but the evidence nevertheless clearly indicates that he has been – and remains – the linchpin behind a massive and coordinated effort to undermine not only illiberal institutions and others he deems to be opponents of his agenda but democracy itself all over the world. The sooner the threat he poses to genuine freedom everywhere is brought to light, the sooner this problem can be addressed. Better late than never.
Read full article: George Soros: Makings of a Messianic Billionaire.
This essay was originally published by Russia Insider who, unlike their mainstream contemporaries, are seemingly unafraid when it comes to speaking truth to power. Often we find that this power to whom we must speak truth is in the hands of elite Jews. That’s not antisemitic, nor is it an indication of Nazism; it’s a plain fact. It’s also a fact that Jewish people dominated some of the most murderous political movements in recent modern history, most notably communism. In fact, 80% of the upper echelons of the Bolshevik Party in 1922 Russia were ethnically Jewish, just as in Germany the vast majority – up to 90% – of those involved with the attempted Communist uprising in 1919 were Jewish. However, historical wrongs aside, there is just as much reason to drop this taboo in contemporary politics, for one can often find a Jew or Jewish interests behind a number of problematic movements in the 21st century. The most notable of these is neo-conservatism, which in practise is an odd blend of Jacobin universalism and Trotskyite statism, which has embroiled the West in a number of calamitous and bloody campaigns to bomb foreign countries into accepting democracy. An odd premise, when one considers it thoroughly. There is also the inclination to believe that a great number of those elites standing in the way of an understanding between Europe and Russia are, of course, American Jews. It must be said that there are plenty of gentiles taking up this mantle too, but under who’s direction? This brilliant essay attempts to untangle these complex networks of power and openly, honestly and without prejudice, discuss the subversive influence that some Jews have in modern Western politics.
By Charles Bausman.
Most people know about, but few are willing to condemn, the strict taboo in the media, of criticizing Jews as a group, using that term. One cannot even criticize a small subsection of Jews, a miniscule percentage of the Jewish population, even when they richly deserve it.
Obviously, this is a ridiculous way to run a publication whose object is to get to the truth, so I am writing this to explain why, from now on, the pages of Russia Insider will be open to articles which fairly and honestly address the influence of Jewish elites, including pointing out when it is malevolent, which it often is, and try to understand it and explain it, with malice towards none.
I have become convinced that unless we break this taboo, nothing will improve in the human catastrophe unfolding in geopolitics. Millions have died over the past 30 years, and if we want it to stop that trend and avoid a cataclysm which seems to be approaching inexorably, we have to have the freedom to criticize those responsible. It is very clear to me, as it is to many others, that much of the guilt for this comes from Jewish pressure groups, particularly in the media.
I can see as an editor, that much of what is written about geopolitics in the ‘public square,’ admirable though it may be in other respects, makes itself irrelevant by tiptoeing around this crucial issue.
I am a newcomer to the media world, unexpectedly thrust three years ago into the role of owner, publisher and editor of this fairly widely-read publication. We get about 10 million visits per month across all of our platforms from a sophisticated audience, and we are widely followed by so-called ‘influencers.’ We’ve made a big mark in a short time, and we did it by saying what others were not willing to say. Many subjects which we were the first to speak about on a major platform have now entered the mainstream.
Russia Insider is a grassroots phenomenon, and sometimes resembles a political movement as much as it does a publication. We exist solely because of small donations from readers. We get no funding from major donors, not to mention governments, foundations, or other organized groups. It is all private individuals. Our single largest donation over the past year was $5000, and the median gift is $30. We raised about $80,000 last year. This gives us the freedom to pretty much say what we want, something that can be said of very few publications, even in the alternative media space, most of whom are beholden to large donors.
I see every day how one can influence the public agenda by addressing or ignoring certain topics. One really can make a difference, and I have tried to have a positive impact, as I understand it. It has been a remarkable education in the power of the media, even of our relatively small Russia Insider.
But this taboo is the great exception. It really is quite extraordinary to realize that you can publish about just about anything, except that. As I said, just about everyone knows about the taboo, and I did too in my previous career in business, but it is another thing altogether to enforce it — which I felt, until recently, compelled to do — and to have your nose rubbed in it every day when trying to make sense of world events.
Some try to skirt the taboo with euphemisms. A veritable cottage industry has emerged, ever inventing new ones. Indeed, this is the new trend in the alt-media. We hear a lot about ‘Zionists,’ ‘elites,’ ‘global elites,’ ‘globalists,’ ‘neocons,’ ‘liberal interventionists,’ ‘the war party,’ ‘the Israel lobby,’ ‘the deep state,’ ‘bankers,’ ‘new world order’ (I’ve never understood what that is, actually), ‘Bilderbergers’ — sounds like a nice man from a central-European fairytale. My friend the Saker goes with ‘Anglozionists.’
But none of these terms work, do they? They all obscure the issue, actually enhancing the taboo’s inherent deceit.
Zionists? Really? I’ve never heard anyone describe themselves this way, or even other people describe them – ‘Have you meet Max?, he’s an enthusiastic Zionist!’ I’ve never seen it mentioned as an interest in a social media profile (perhaps Facebook should include it as an Emoticon). Maybe Rachel Maddow IS a Zionist, what do I know, although as far as I understand, Zionism was a political movement that lost its urgency once the state of Israel was well on its merry way. Elites? Well, no, I would reckon many Jews are elites, but more Jews are not, and more elites are non-Jews, so no, that doesn’t work. Well, you get the idea. These are attempts to slip past the ever-zealous censor, and they serve to maintain the confusion and deception.
No, the only trait that these people have in common is their Jewish heritage. Some are liberals, some are conservatives. Some are religious, some are not. Some are mixed Jewish heritage, some are not. Some care about Israel, some do not. Some support Israel others criticise her. They are politicians, journalists, academics, comedians, actors, or, businessmen. Some stem from Western Europe, others from Eastern Europe, and others from the Middle East.
Hostility to Putin’s Russia is a largely Jewish phenomenon
Russia Insider’s mission is to explain and describe Russia and her role in the world. As soon as you begin to drill into how other nations relate to Russia, and Russian history, it becomes obvious that the unreasonable hostility towards Putin’s Russia, particularly coming from the US and the UK, is very much a Jewish phenomenon, and has been for centuries.
And yes, ‘Jewish’ is the only term that accurately describes it, and not one of the many euphemisms we frequently see used.
The most vitriolic and obsessive Russia-bashing journalists in the media are mostly Jewish. The publications which push these writers most energetically are ALL Jewish-owned, and as a publisher, I know very well, that is where the buck stops.
On the policy side, the neo-conservative movement, Russia’s harshest foe, was conceived of, is led by, and consists mostly of, Jews. And their trouble-making extends far beyond Russia – they are responsible for America’s disastrous debacle in the Middle East over the last 20 years – where their crimes have been stymied by precisely one country – Russia. The psychotically anti-Russian recent UN ambassadors, Nikki Haley and Samantha Power, were put there by the Israel lobby, and given an independent brief, in other words, they answer not to their presidents, rather to their Jewish sponsors.
In Congress the biggest Russia-Gate tub-thumpers are noticeably Jewish – Schiff, Schumer, Cardin, Blumenthal, Franken (although not as overwhelmingly as in the media). The Israel lobby routinely enforces legislation hostile to Russia. Bill Browder with his Magnitsky Sanctions – is Jewish.
But let’s talk about the media – for this is where the real power lies. All other levers and branches of government pale in comparison when it comes to real political influence.
At the two leading newspapers of the land, the New York Times and The Washington Post, both very Jewish in ownership, editors, and staff, have been waging an all-out jihad against Putin’s Russia, and are guilty of the most grotesque dishonesty, slander and journalistic malpractice – exhaustively catalogued by one of the most authoritative and admired veteran journalists in America, Robert Parry, winner of the Polk award, among other accolades. You can see an archive of his extraordinary work criticizing these two publications, particularly in relation to Russia, here. Trump and his supporters are up in arms about these two papers’ serial mendacity about him both before and after his election – well they have been doing the same with Putin and Russia for a good 18 years now, and gone much further in their dishonesty, hard as that might be to believe.
PBS, with its lily-white image as purveyor of Masterpiece Theater and other highbrow offerings, is wholly dependent on donations from wealthy Jews. Like some Gentile starlet submitting to Harvey Weinstein, that station has allowed itself to be used, churning out a relentless stream of the most ridiculous anti-Putin propaganda that would be funny if it wasn’t so effective among the gray-haired, non-flyover denizens of America, and their deep pocketbooks. CNN, a deeply Jewish company, has been pushing Russiagate like a religion, to the point where their brand has suffered severe damage.
Rachel Maddow, the nation’s most popular and influential liberal political show host is Jewish. She has gone so overboard demonizing Russia and pushing Russiagate that she has become a figure of fun. On the print side, the list is the same – the ones shrieking the loudest are mostly Jews, and disproportionately female – and there is an important lesson there too – Masha Gessen, Anne Applebaum, and Julia loffe, to name a few.
The refrain from the male chorus is no less strident. David Remnick, David Frum, Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer. Even comedy news hates Russia – John Oliver, Jon Stewart (previously), Bill Maher, all Jews, go to great efforts to convince Americans that Putin’s Russia is, quite literally – and this term is frequently used – ‘Hitlerian.’
Jewish-owned high brow magazines have been leading the charge against Putin – the Newhouse’s New Yorker, the NY Review of Books (the management of this venerable magazine is obsessed with the subject). The New Republic, Newsweek, The Atlantic, and the Rothschild-owned Economist pump out story after story full of what can only be called lies, in a massive campaign to demonize Russia and Putin.
Timothy Snyder, the Yale historian, and Michael Weiss, the neocon firebrand whose website, The Interpreter, is funded by the exiled Jewish oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, are two more prominent figures in this phenomenon.
The Economist deserves special mention with Ed Lucas leading the charge (previously), (he is the great nephew of Charles Portal, allegedly Jewish chief of the air staff in Britain during WW2 who was allegedly a relentless proponent of fire-bombing German civilians and is thought to be behind the burning of Dresden). I suppose having a purported war criminal in the family means never having to say you are sorry. Equally vitriolic are the writings of Ben Judah and his father, Tim.
But to draw attention to all this, or to investigate whether there is something about their Jewishness that makes them so hostile to Russia, is simply, verboten. Inevitably, when I point out this overwhelming ethnic imbalance, people say, well what about the many critics of the hostility to Russia who are Jewish? – the eminently admirable Glenn Greenwald is a prominent example, and there are many others. The answer is, that the exception to a trend doesn’t disprove it, and can often serve to mask it.
A de facto violation of free speech
The truth is, that in a nation which frantically pats itself on the shoulder for enshrining ‘free speech’ in its national credo, and ceaselessly lectures others on the subject with pompous sanctimony, speech is not de facto free on this crucial and world-threatening subject, a remarkable, and dangerous, state of affairs. I will not be clapped into prison for publishing this article, but the taboo works like a charm to keep the topic out of public discussion. Who needs repressive laws when you can con people into censoring themselves? In Germany, the dominant power in Europe, and in other European countries, I could be locked up for it – another shocking thought, for this son of Germany.
The Jewish dominance of the Russia-bashing phenomenon is far more extensive than I can convey in a couple of short paragraphs, and I urge someone to do this in a more systematic way. I will be happy to publish it.
Shutting down an honest examination of Russia’s history
One of the most spectacular aspects of the taboo is how it whitewashes one of the most extraordinary events in the history of mankind, the Russian revolution.
Many White Russians fleeing the revolution believed that it was mostly a Jewish coup d’etat, financed by wealthy bankers in New York and London who were sworn enemies of Christian Tsarism. Indeed there is strong evidence to suggest that this is true. This view argues that the terror visited on Russia during the civil war and its aftermath, continuing well into the Stalin years, for he could not really control it either, was a Jewish one. Cursory evidence also suggests that this is so, if only because so much of the Bolshevik leadership was Jewish, in particular, Trotsky, but also many other vicious personalities, especially in the secret police which so terrorized the Russian people.
Henry Ford was heavily influenced by this view, which he heard from Russian emigres, augmenting his anti-semitism, and it has been well-documented by liberal mainstream historians that the German National Socialist movement became radically more anti-semitic in reaction to this interpretation, which they adopted, strongly influenced by an influx of White Russians finding refuge in Europe. But one doesn’t hear a whisper about all this in mainstream historical articles, even to debunk it, presumably because someone might have their ‘feelings’ hurt.
This all reverberates to this day. The virulent and entrenched anti-semitism in today’s Ukraine is a direct heir of this White Russian view. This is because the Nazis had long-standing subversive programs implemented by their White Russian allies inside Ukraine and the Baltics, which were heavily German in ethnicity. The famines of the 30s increased the sentiment. When Hitler invaded, this work paid off magnificently, and Western Ukraine enthusiastically welcomed him and fought with his armies, as did many in the Baltics. After the war, German intelligence, in return for clemency, traded this network to the CIA, which continued the program to destabilize the USSR, and these programs, representing significant financial and institutional support continued right through the cold war, and into the present day.
What happened in 2014 in the Ukraine had a 100-year provenance, and is inextricably linked to alleged Jewish culpability for the revolution. But for all the gallons of ink spilled about the events of 2014, this crucial background is left largely undiscussed, even in the alternative media (I of all people, can attest to this).
Such is the reach and devastating effect of this taboo.
The enormity of the omission is mind-boggling. The suffering of the Russian people in the decades after the revolution was extraordinary – and here there is little agreement – modern revisionists insist that the revolution and its aftermath claimed perhaps 2 million victims, others say it reached into the 10s of millions. And it is not just the number of people, but the way it was carried out – families ripped apart, fathers hauled off in the middle of the night, churches blown up, priests tortured and subjected to ritual murder, phony confessions beaten out of innocents, summary executions without trial, an enforced culture of snitching, millions sent to slave labor camps – a nation was held in terror for decades, traumatized to this day. If there is even the slightest suspicion that this was in essence, a Jewish pogrom against ethnic Russians, surely it deserves some public examination.
But no, it seems people think observing the taboo is more important.
We try on Russia Insider to give exposure to this view of events, which I believe deserves a hearing – I am not enough of an expert to say whether it is correct – but so effective is the taboo, that there is little of quality available. There is a very substantial body of work available about this in Russian, most of it written since the fall of Communism, – in contrast to the West, this is a widely discussed view inside Russia – so the heavy lifting has been done – it just needs to be rendered into English.
The best alt-media journalists are neutered
One of the things we do at RI is to scan the alternative media for what we think are the best articles about Russia, and republish them with a link to the original. We also keep an eye on what we think are the most dishonest articles – and critique them, and it is this comprehensive surveying of the writers and the publications that gives me such a strong understanding of the Jewishness of the hostility. The casual reader’s awareness of it may be anecdotal – I can assure you, it is more pronounced than people realize. When you read, catalog, analyze, track, and critique this river of thought 8 hours a day it becomes starkly obvious.
I am routinely and happily amazed by the fantastic writing about Russia, left, right, and center, in the alternative media, which comes from a most impressive cast of characters, the bulk of it about geopolitics. The intellectual heft and scholarship is extraordinary. Borrowing from this brilliance, we put out a deeper and more thorough analysis of things Russia-related than news organizations with 20 times our budget.
Some of these men are true heroes, speaking truth to power, fighting back against a system gone horribly wrong, brave, selfless, often sacrificing career and financial well-being – but there is one line they won’t cross.
Much of what is written about Russian relations and history becomes meaningless and deceptive
Sadly, a lot of what they write, is, meaningless, and almost amounts to professional malpractice, because the Jewish push for confrontation with Russia is, by far, the most significant factor. Excluding it from a discussion of geopolitics is ignoring the elephant, not in the corner, rather the one dancing a Mazurka in the middle of the room. We should not forget that willful omission is a species of lying, and is recognized as such in a court of law, and this case is no different.
The omission is misleading, and sows endless confusion, for it compels writers to place blame where it does not really belong – the list of culprits is endless: ‘Democrats,’ Liberals,’ sometimes it is ‘America did this,’ or ‘Americans did that,’ or it is Trump, or Obama, or Hillary, or Rex Tillerson, or John McCain, or the Military-Industrial-Complex, the Deep State, the Intelligence Community, and on and on. Yes, these individuals are complicit, (except ‘America,’ it is a ridiculous notion that we 350 million souls collectively agree on anything) but it is not their spineless treachery that is of prime importance, rather the powerful Jews in American politics and media who so easily compel them to dance to their tune.
A lesson in relevance from the Alt-Right
The Alt-Right is helpful in understanding Russia, because it has intellectual heft, and produces a lot of good writing about Russia and Russian relations, much of which is spot-on. We follow the Alt-Right media and republish the occasional article, and they are invariably very popular on Russia Insider – largely, I think, because they are offering a fresh point of view, and talking about vitally important issues others refuse to address.
The Alt-Right is a youth movement. Its leaders are mostly in their 30s, and the rank and file, which is large indeed, running, by some estimates, into the 10s of millions globally, seems to mostly range from mid-teens to mid-20s. Much of the Alt-Right has completely discarded this taboo and revels in flouting it, indeed, trampling on it, as is the wont of young people regarding the more tedious and preposterous conventions of every era.
It is axiomatic, I think, that one way youth benefits society, is that they question what the old men are saying – shake things up a bit, make them examine their assumptions. It is no coincidence that in the Emperor With No Clothes children’s story, it is a child who points out the obvious, what the adults are so desperately pretending not to see, because it will impair their material well-being.
Pointing out the pernicious effects of the influence of certain Jewish elites on many aspects of American and European society and politics, as the Alt-Right does, greatly assists in understanding how politics really work.
If you doubt this, then I highly recommend that you listen to a couple of episodes of the most popular Alt-Right podcasts, like Fash the Nation, or Richard Spencer’s Alt-Right Politics, easily accessible by smartphone. The Fash the Nation hosts are two Beltway policy wonks who sound like they are in their late 20s or early 30s, who spend a couple hours each week talking politics. In their analysis, when relevant, and not over-stating it, they point out when Jewish interests are at play, when politicians, journalists, lobbyists, publishers, publications, foundations, or their main funders, allies, spouses, and backers, are Jewish. The gang at Alt-Right Politics does the same. It becomes very clear what is intuitively obvious – that blotting out any mention of this hampers any serious discussion.
By blowing up this taboo, the Alt-Right is making itself relevant, and those who cling to it, irrelevant. A taboo only works if it is universally observed – if a sizable number of people begin ignoring it, everyone else begins to look increasingly ridiculous. Liberals spend an inordinate amount of time wringing their hands about the Alt-Right. By refusing to openly and fairly discuss Jewish influence, they are handing them a powerful competitive advantage.
The Alt-Right is doing society a service by addressing an issue that urgently needs sunlight, and by providing an ecosystem of websites and podcasts where authors can be published and critiqued, and points argued back and forth. Much of the discussion of Jewish influence in the Alt-Right is very scholarly, fair and balanced, i.e. the work of Kevin MacDonald or Michael Hoffman.
I believe the Alt-Right will continue to gain traction, simply because they intelligently discuss two sacred cows – the Jewish Question, and, closely linked to it, racial equality in terms of abilities, and the desirability of mixed-race societies. As long as they are addressing these two crucial issues, and no one else is, they will grow.
Malice towards none
Another pernicious effect of taboos is that they can lead to angry outbursts. When problems are not addressed, they tend to fester and worsen, until they become intolerable, and then there is sometimes a sudden and violent reaction. You can see this dynamic in the public discussion of the malevolent influence of Jewish elites. Some people, when they finally perceive its reach and harm, having been misled by people they admired and trusted, lash out in anger – a common reaction when you find out you’ve been deceived about something vitally important. This, I believe, is another reason to be rid of this taboo as soon as possible – it has a way of making things worse.
Obviously, this discussion should be done without any hatred or anger to Jews as a whole. The Jews who are causing the trouble – the ones at the pinnacles of political and media power, are a small group indeed. Anyone who has grown up with and knows Jews well, as I have, knows that they are like people everywhere – basically decent, and this has been my overwhelming personal experience. It is their elite institutions that for some reason are clearly malevolent, and this demands public examination, not the least by Jews themselves.
What I am calling for is criticizing the elites who have given their nation a very bad name, and figuring out why this pattern repeats itself throughout history.
The problem extends to all areas of public life
The ongoing sex scandals which grace our front pages seem to provide an exclamation point to the phenomenon. Across the board, from Hollywood to entertainment to media to Washington, the poor sods being called out by the screeching harpy mob tend towards a certain ethnicity, not to mention the leading men in the spectacle. For all the talk and blather and belly button contemplation that the drama is evoking, no one, outside the Alt-Right, mentions this obvious fact, for it would be impolite.
The problem seems to arise when Jews get into positions of influence, i.e., when they join the dreaded ‘elites.’ Then, for some reason, regardless of their political sympathies or other particulars, they get up to no good – and something goes seriously wrong. Maybe the powerful Jewish institutions – the media, the banks, the movie studios, the music industry, etc, are in the hands of degenerates who demand bad behavior as the price of admission, and then enforce it. I really don’t know, but obviously, the question begs for an examination, as the evidence suggests that much of human enterprise dominated and shaped by Jews is a bottomless pit of trouble with a peculiar penchant for mendacity and cynicism, hostility to Christianity and Christian values, and in geopolitics, a clear bloodlust.
Hollywood and TV dramas? A completely Jewish-dominated industry, and a soulless spiral of depravity and cynicism, which only worsens with each passing year. Financial markets? – ditto – just watch the movies The Big Short or The Wolf of Wall Street for a particularly vivid illustration. Pop music and the rap nightmare? – ditto. The state of Israel and its treatment of the Palestinians? – more of the same. American foreign policy? – an unmitigated disaster which has murdered millions and squandered trillions over the last 30 years.
And I think ‘murder’ is the right word here – I think if you would ask the relatives of the 2 or so million Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, Yemenis, East Ukrainians, or Serbs who died in the wars instigated by the largely Jewish-dictated US foreign policy over the past couple of decades, that they would back me up on that.
In each of these cases, one sees a tendency towards dishonesty. Indeed the whole ‘Fake News’ phenomenon, is fundamentally Jewish. It is the Jewish-owned American and European media which churn out an astonishing quantity of what can only be called lies.
We need serious scholarship and analysis
Yes, 1900 years after the exasperated Romans scattered the Hebrew tribes to the four winds, the ‘JQ’ is still a huge, messy, unsolved problem, and in our age, it is reaching yet another crisis. I can only speak with authority on a subject I know a lot about: Western foreign policy towards Russia, and the Jewish influence there, is nothing short of an extinction-level threat to the entire planet. I am sure experts in Middle Eastern politics would confirm something similar.
All this needs scholarship and serious inquiry, to finally get to the bottom of this ongoing tragedy, a tragedy for both Jew and Gentile alike. Some writers have made important inroads, like Kevin MacDonald, but much more needs to be done to understand the problem.
One serious writer, Michael Hoffman, in his book Judaism’s Strange Gods, argues the problem is with modern Judaism, which has changed radically from the religion of the Old Testament, effectively hijacked by various Jewish sects such as the New Testament era Pharisees who inspire misanthropic behavior among elites. I really can’t say, but it is precisely this kind of inquiry which is needed to figure out, as our president likes to say ‘what the hell is going on.’
Low expectations from the existing alt-media
I know that many writers and editors in the alt-media, and the alt-lite, privately agree with what I have written here, but we should not expect many of them to break the taboo anytime soon. The reason is that they mostly barely hang on financially, and often work for tiny wages, and any such change in editorial policy would knock out a certain part of their funding (not to mention some of their better authors), making their financial situation untenable. Some are beholden to foundations or governments who would pull support. The needed intellectual work is going to be done on the few platforms whose support base will tolerate it – and this will mostly be on the Alt-Right, or publications that can buck the tide, like Russia Insider.
A call for articles and support
I met strong resistance to the ideas expressed here from colleagues, staff and columnists who contribute to RI. I’ve discussed it at length with many of them. Some of the best writers on the site, and some of the most articulate critics of America’s inane policy towards Russia, are Jewish. Some agree with me privately, but say that to do so publicly would so damage their careers that they cannot. Some do not agree.
Russia Insider depends heavily on reader contributions, and I suppose this will curtail donations from some, so if you agree with this article, then now would be a good time to click on the donate button.
Discussion of the Jewish problem (and ‘problem’ is the right word here) is obviously not going to be the focus of Russia Insider – we try to be primarily about Russia, but I am willing to give space to this issue, and not just as it relates to Russia. I invite all writers, including from the Alt-Right, to get in touch with me directly at email@example.com with article ideas, proposals, or anything else, and yes, we will publish articles which use (((echoes))).
It is my great regret that we are not in a position to pay authors for articles. If anyone reading this is in a position to help provide funding to pay writers on this important subject, that would be helpful, because it immediately raises the quality and depth of the writing. If you are interested, please get in touch with me directly.
At the end of the day, I don’t care whether other people agree with me on this or not, whether I lose or gain authors or donations, traffic or influence, or whether the big tech platforms try to hush us up (they are already actively doing so). I started this site in the Fall of 2014 to call out a terrible crime, a whopping lie being told, by the media, most vociferously by Jews in very influential Jewish-owned publications, (Andrew Kramer and the editorial board of the New York Times being the prime example) about the conflict in the Ukraine. I didn’t see it as a Jewish problem then – I just knew it wasn’t true. I knew relatively little about Jewish influence at the time. But after three years of immersing myself in political analysis and media criticism, it is as plain as day that this is the case.
Russia Insider earned respect by doing our best to tell the truth, and calling out flagrant dishonesty in the media.
We’re not about to stop now.
Read full article: It’s Time to Drop the Jew Taboo.
“We do not want this atomized world of individuals without gender, without mother, without father, without nation.” These are the words of the young French politician, Marion Maréchal-Le Pen at this year CPAC.
She started her speech by greeting the American public and referencing the longtime alliance between France and the United States dating back to the Independence war, she then said:” I hope I am less terrifying than as the American media depicts me. Anyway, you seem much less terrifying than as the French media depicts you.” The American MSM media often slandered Le Pen before her arrival in the US, especially the infamous Reagan Battalion, which stooped so low to label Marion and her Party, Front National, as a National Socialist organization simply because FN is not a heavy supporter of the free market, which obviously makes them literal Nazis, right? Boomer Battalion says so.
After the first remarks, Marion started discussing the first topic, something that Americans love more than anything: Freedom. She stated:” No, France is no longer free today! The French are not free to choose their policies, whether they are economic, monetary, on immigration or even diplomacy. Our freedom is now in the hands of the European Union. This European Union is not Europe. It is an ideology that looks only to the future while being contaminated with historic amnesia. An ideology without land, without people, without roots, without soul, and without civilization. EU is in the process of slowly killing millenary nations.”
Amazing and touching words coming from the young politician, words that all nationalists around the European continent share and understand. The EU is not Europe, it’s an authoritarian system that is slowly destroying the nation states and the various European Identities.
Le Pen also had some words for the America First movement, she said:”Let me be clear here: I’m not offended when I hear President Trump say America first. In fact, I want America first for the American people. I want Britain first for the British people. And I want France first for the French people!”
There is nothing wrong with wanting the best for you own country, this is what Nationalism is about.
Marion also had thoughts about the state of modern society and the importance of things like family and values, she stated:”Without nation and without family, the limit of the common good, natural law and collective morality disappears as the reign of egoism continues.”
The current reign of egoism is the manifestation of modernism, a shallow ideology which forces individualism and the atomization of society on the younger generations, the biggest victims of modern society.
She then continued on the family theme saying:”Even children have now become a merchandise! The generation “I have the right” affirms “we have the right to order a child on catalog”. “we have the right to rent a women’s womb. “we have the right to deprive a child of a mother or father.” No you don’t! A child is not a right.”
Various important topics were touched by Le Pen during her speech, topics often treated as taboos. Marion talked about pride, guilt, atomization of society, identity, enrootment to the land, peoples, legacy, survival of nations, family and many more. A beautiful speech, well received from the American public. The tide is turning, Le Pen reminded us, the Nationalists, why we should fight. And we will fight!
A few weeks ago, the lying media hacks were falling all over themselves to eulogise this so-called ‘new discovery’ that, as they put it, ‘the first Britons were black‘. They based this on the work of Jewish scientist Yoan Dickmann who, despite not being the first to analyse the mitochondrial DNA of the ‘Cheddar Man remains’, decided to reveal the world that England’s oldest remains were those of a dark-skinned man. The owner of said remains has been dubbed ‘Cheddar Man’ by the media, in reference to Cheddar Gorge, Somerset, the area in England in which it was found. And there was born a new catchphrase; ‘Cheddar Man, the first Briton, was black!’
There are so many things wrong with this pseudo-science that it’s difficult to know where to begin in terms of debunking it. We could, of course, look at how one could not possibly ascertain skin complexion from mitochondrial DNA, or from any other related evidence on the remains, and that his skin tone is an estimate (bordering on a blind guess) at best. Or, we could question the fact that a black man with blue eyes would be an entirely new sub-species of humanity, given that such a combination doesn’t exist as a rule in any of the planet’s existing races. We could also question why earlier research, based on the same data, provided an image with much lighter skin, or that Cheddar Man could have been a slave or an anomaly amongst migratory peoples.
But in comparison to the real debunking science behind the most pertinent rebuttal of the Cheddar Man hoax, these aforementioned counter-arguments are secondary and immaterial. In fact, we don’t even really need to exert ourselves at all to find the evidence that rebukes the ‘Britons were black’ argument, because a fantastic article on the matter was written just yesterday by the BBC’s science editor, the very same science editor who penned a rather forced article on Cheddar Man just 10 days’ ago. To be fair to him, he was probably under considerable political pressure to write the first article, and I imagine he then felt compelled to write the second in order to atone for his earlier moment of weakness.
In any event, the second article did get written, entitled ‘Ancient Briton’s replaced by newcomers’. And the premise of this piece is actually not anything we didn’t already know, it’s just the dates of certain events are kept deliberately vague in order to gaslight Englishmen into actually believing that ‘they wuz kangz…’. Thankfully, the BBC’s science editor has provided the dates should any laymen wish to read both articles and make a comparison – which, by the way, I highly recommend.
In order to understand exactly where the discrepancy lies, it’s important to note that the so-called Cheddar Man remains are the oldest human (or close relation) remains ever found on the British Isles, dated at 10,000 years’ old (Mesolithic Period). It’s also prudent to consider that the predominant Haplogroup found in these remains is Haplogroup U5.
Yet the proven theory of the population of the British Isles, and much of Europe for that matter, is that the bulk of modern day native inhabitants derive their DNA from the Neolithic Invasions circa 6000 BCE. This is essentially the premise of our BBC editor’s second article, that by 2500 BCE the Neolithic tribes brought a new way of life to the British Isles from what is today Belgium and the Netherlands, that greatly increased their propensity to dominate the demographics; burying the dead, new farming methods and so on. The evidence suggests that the native population of the British Isles, a few hundred Cheddar Men of whatever colour, were almost completely wiped out, and the remaining minority absorbed into the Neolithic – or, Proto-Indo-European – gene pool.
This is corroborated by the Haplogroup data. For instance, the Proto-Indo-European migrations are characterised by two particular groups, namely R1a and R1b, as well as other notable inclusions such as I. Today, Haplogroup R1b is the predominant – to the tune of 70-90% – foundation of the populations of England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, France, Netherlands, Belgium and North-Eastern Spain, whilst R1a is the predominant Haplogroup for populations in Eastern Europe, such as the Baltic States and European Russia. Predictably, populations in between such as the Germans, Austrians and so on, have a combination of both, but with R1b the dominant Haplogroup in these peoples. Further north in Scandinavia, and down south in the Ukraine, there is a greater prevalence of the I Haplogroup, another key marker of the Proto-Indo-Europeans.
Haplogroup U5 on the other hand, the foundation for Cheddar Man’s Y DNA, is almost non-existent in these regions. The only regions of Europe that have this Haplogroup in any concentration are the Sami regions of northern Scandinavia, the Inuit populations in Greenland and the Urals in Russia. It is no surprise, then, that these are Finno-Urgic peoples who more closely resemble Mongolians and the wider oriental world than they do Indo-Europeans. Notably England, where so-called Cheddar Man was discovered, can claim less than 5% U5 as the foundation for its native peoples’ Y DNA.
As a point of interest, the second article pertaining to the Neolithic invasions does offer some clues as to where the native peoples of England come from. It’s mostly information to which we are already privy, particularly those of us with an interest in genetics and archaeology, but it’s worth briefly noting here that England was populated by what are known as the Beaker people. The Beaker tribes were part of the Germanic branch of the Proto-Indo-Europeans, or Germano-Celtic depending on preferred semantics, who link present day Englishmen, Dutch, Germans, Austrians, Franks and so on, through partial common ancestry.
The Proto-Indo-Europeans from whom modern Europeans are descended lived around the Pontic Steppe, around present-day Crimea and the Azov region in Ukraine. There is also some suggestion they inhabited Eastern Anatolia, or what is presently Turkey and the Caucasus. From these “PIE Homelands”, these peoples spread in all directions; north, into European Russia; north-east, into Western and Central Europe, and south-east, into Iran and Western India. This, again, is supported by the Haplogroup evidence that shows a strong distribution of strands R1b and R1a in all of the regions that the Proto-Indo-Europeans dispersed to.
With them, they brought the Indo-European languages and culture, which are often in themselves good genetic markers of historical migrations. They also brought their religious systems, which laid the foundations for the Pagan beliefs of the Greeks, Romans, Germanic and Nordic tribes of Europe, and also created the basis of Hinduism on the Indian subcontinent – often attested to being the world’s oldest religion, and a Proto-Indo-European religion – as well as Iran’s native religion Zoroastrianism. They brought an entirely new way of life than what the hunter-gatherer peoples of Europe knew at that time, and their ability to replace existing populations almost entirely is testament to the advanced nature of their agricultural and general cultural ability.
The crucial point here is that the so-called ‘Cheddar Man’ is, in all likelihood, no ancestral relative of ours at all. The Indo-Europeans, who for the most part are one people, are descended from the Neolithic farming tribes of Anatolia and the Pontic Steppe, just as the mainstream media has very quietly admitted. The fact that they still push this ‘Britons were black’ Cheddar Man theory is a demonstration of just how dishonest they are, and exactly the lengths of pseudo-science they will extend to in order to gaslight Europeans into accepting more foreigners.
Read full article: ‘Cheddar Man’ Theory Rebuffed: The TRUTH About Ancient Europeans.
Two Pakistani men were arrested today in the southern Italian city of Brindisi, il Messagero reports, for allegedly raping a boy waiting for a train in the station. The two alleged rapists are called Rab Nawaz and Ali Imram, both in their late twenties.
According to the information collected the two men first approached the Italian boy in a provoking way, the boy then tried to escape but was caught and brought in a small alley. The boy tried to resist but in vain. After raping the poor boy the two criminals escaped with their car, but were caught by a nearby camera and later arrested by the police, who the boy himself called. The two Pakistanis have already been brought to the local jail.
This is not the first time even boys are targeted by Muslims in Europe, especially Pakistanis who come from a country which has huge problems when it comes to pedophilia and grooming young kids. Thanks to this mad idea of welcoming people from all around the globe even boys are no longer safe.
Read full article: Italy: boy is raped by 2 Pakistani men while waiting for a train.
After sequencing the genome and performing facial reconstruction on the fossil of 1903 finding, “Cheddar Man,” researchers now surmise that the approximately 10,000-year-old hunter-gatherer was a dark-skinned, dark-haired, blue-eyed lad in his twenties who originally came from either Africa or the Middle East—which might speak to why at least 75% of Europe’s incoming migrants are fighting-age men. Perhaps the “powers that be” anticipated this “revelation” by simply trying to recreate the phenotypical characteristics of Cheddar Man and other Mesolithic fossils found in Spain, Belgium, and Luxembourg. This is cause for celebration, because it is yet another cudgel to pound Whites with, all in the interest of dispossessing them of their ancestral homelands via a deluge of Third World immigration. Europe is going back to its roots!
Genetic research published in 2016 indicates that all Europeans are descended from a single population that arrived in Europe 37,000 years ago and persisted throughout the Ice Age. Were they Cheddar Man’s ancestors? We don’t know. I don’t need to point out the irony of the same commentariat using genetic sequencing to hysterically trumpet the supposition that Cheddar Man may be of a darker pigmentation while simultaneously declaring that race is only skin-deep, as Steven Austad does, which seems to belie the volume at which this latest “discovery” is being broadcast. That Cheddar Man may not even be indigenous to Britain is never interrogated, nor that his supposedly bright blue eyes are extraordinarily rare for people with dark skin. The mere possibility that Cheddar Man might be darker than Prince Harry—that, and the fact that 12,000 years ago “immigrants” arrived in Britain, thus making it “a nation of immigrants”—is an open invitation for the entire world to swamp Old Blighty, evidently.
If, for argument’s sake, Cheddar Man did have dark skin, this speaks more to the rapid pace of evolution than anything else. There’s plenty of evidence debunking the “Out of Africa” theory with respect to the European population, and we should not forget that the average European has about 4% Neanderthal DNA as opposed to naught-point-naught for Africans, which helps explain different immune systems, per the Pasteur Institute. But race is only about skin colour, right? Also lost in the deluge of using dubious science to invalidate indigenous Whites’ credible claims to a homeland of any kind was the discovery last year that hominin fossils in both Bulgaria and Greece dated from 7.2 million years ago—200,000 years or more before the heretofore oldest known hominin fossils from Africa.
In The Tribes of Britain, archaeologist David Miles notes that the preponderance of red hair in native Britons is more concentrated than anywhere else: “Recent studies have shown that there is more red hair in Scotland and Wales than anywhere else in the world. It’s a mutation that probably occurred between 8,000 and 10,000 years ago”—around the time of Cheddar Man. He also notes that the earliest settlers were cut off from the mainland due to rising sea levels and as such, “It’s now more or less agreed that about 80 percent of Britons’ genes come from hunter-gatherers who came in immediately after the Ice Age” 12,000 years ago. “The gene pool of the island has changed, but more slowly and far less completely than implied by the old invasion model,” archaeologist Simon James writes. This 80% of Britons’ genetic material being traceable to the core Younger Dryas settlers is even less than the Irish, as just 12% of their genetic material comes from the last 6,500 years of immigration.
Of course populations migrate, die off, and intermingle, but for CNN’s Dan Jones this means only that, “There are just a bunch of people who happen to be here, right now”—right, and the Bantu, like the Boers, were not indigenous to South Africa, but the prevailing narrative only demonizes one group as conquerors and thus as illegitimate interlopers. The fluidity of nationhood only seems to apply to Western countries. Afua Hirsch (whose Guardian book review opens with: “‘England is an island but not I land,’ say the Rastas. They may have been born in Birmingham or Bristol but they don’t believe they belong in the UK. The same feeling courses through every fibre of Afua Hirsch’s being.”), echoes Jones’s sentiment by stating, “Everyone’s ancestors were immigrants at some point.” But surely she and Jones must understand that nations also have a significant cultural component, especially if the primary take-away from a genetic sequencing is “just” skin colour; in this case it wouldn’t matter in the slightest if Cheddar Man were white or black.
Following Hirsch’s claims to their logical conclusion, this must mean that there are no indigenous peoples since populations have always been fluid, which invalidates all criticisms of European colonialism. If everyone’s ancestors came from somewhere else, certainly there can be no objection to the settlement of New Zealand, New Hampshire, and Rhodesia, right? Even if we accept that we all have common African ancestors, then it would simply be Hirsch’s “Whites [who] weren’t always White” returning home. Surely no one would object to these perfectly natural population movements? Sadiq Khan is just as British as Nicolas Ovando y Caceres was Dominican, n’est-ce pas? And if Whites weren’t always White, how do we explain the fact that, far from WE WUZ KANGZ, ancient Egyptians were much closer genetically to modern Europeans than to the current population of the country? Less than one percent of modern Egyptians, likely almost all Coptics, can trace their genetic heritage back to the ancient Egyptians, but the rest are Arab with some sub-Saharan admixture. Now that’s a nation of immigrants!
Read full article: Have Some Cheese with that Whine: Cheddar Man as Migrant Avatar.
A majority in the House of Representatives are supportive of a legislative change proposed by the government that will ban referenda in the Netherlands. The law will be put to a vote on Thursday, and it’s expected to pass by a comfortable majority.
The government is presently comprised of a centre-right coalition – if ever one needed reminding that even conservatives are fully in bed with the globalist agenda – of which belongs minister Kasja Ollongren, who claimed that their reasoning behind this flagrant violation of democracy is that ‘referendums confuse voters’.
The current law is a good model for direct democracy, and it states that the government must hold a referendum on an issue should it receive 300,000 or more requests to do so. Despite this high benchmark, the law has enabled the Dutch to make their voice heard.
Proposing a change in the law is, predictably, shrouded in the guise of doing what’s best for the citizen – who is obviously too stupid to understand complex political matters – and for democracy. Yet their true motivation is considerably more cynical and disturbing.
In 2005, the Dutch establishment and the upper echelons of the European Union were stunned when the Dutch people voted against the proposed European Constitution by a margin of 2:1. This was hardly surprising, though, as every nation that held such a referendum also voted against this hated imposition of liberal federalism.
The result became an embarrassment for the Dutch government, who could not ratify the treaty without losing considerable democratic authority with its own people. As it happens, the EU Constitution was simply renamed the Lisbon Treaty and ratified anyway, without a vote.
Then, in 2016, the Dutch people were victorious over their government’s agenda by a margin of 2:1, in a referendum on whether the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement should or should not be ratified. Again, this was a huge embarrassment for the government – who proceeded to ratify the treaty anyway.
Quite simply, the current attempt to ban referenda is the government cracking down on democracy as public opinion turns against them.
The extent to which the people despise the establishment parties in the Netherlands can be seen in the recent election results. Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s centre-right party achieved just 21.3% of the vote at the last election in 2017.
On the other hand, Geert Wilders’ anti-Islamification party (PVV) became the second largest party, and Theirry Baudet’s new party Forum for Democracy (FvD) entered parliament for the first time. Baudet described those attempting to change the referendum law as “assassins of democracy”, something which the President of the House immediately forced him to retract.
Referenda are important because they highlight the dramatic divergence between governmental direction and popular opinion even moreso when the government ignores the result
Of course those in power recognise this, hence they want referenda consigned to history where they can no longer be harmful to the globalist agenda.
Read full article: Dutch Government To Ban Referenda… Because They ‘Confuse Voters’.
Massimiliano Ursino, a member and regional leader of the Fascist party Forza Nuova, was walking through via Dante at 7pm when he got ambushed by Antifa. The communists tied up the man with packing tape and violently beat him. The man suffered heavy wounds, his head was the most targeted part.
The communist assailants, wearing black clothes and with their faces masked with scarfs and hats, vanished after beating the man almost unconscious. Forza Nuova spokesperson released a statement blaming a far-left journalist named Parenzo and a far-left politician, Laura Boldrini, who both openly endorse the Antifascist cause.
The political tension in Italy is heating up and Antifa has become rather aggressive in the last weeks, which have been full of clashes between Antifa and the police force all around the country. The same people who claim that they are fighting for freedom and against any form of totalitarianism are using violent tactics to silence and hurt anyone they disagree with. Matteo Salvini, Lega’s leader, has been attacked multiple times by Antifa in the last years and just a week ago Giorgia Meloni, Fratelli D’Italia’s leader, got assaulted and spat on by communists in the Tuscan city of Livorno.
It doesn’t matter if you are a moderate, a conservative or a real fascist. Antifa will try to shut you down because, in the end, they are what they are: degenerate communists and anarchists. Any person who nowadays supports democracy cannot support or even tolerate Antifa.
The elections will happen in less than 2 weeks and a possible win of the right-wing coalition will likely escalate the tensions. It would not be that surprising if some right-winger will get killed by the communists anytime soon, the current climate really reminds any Italian of the Lead years, a dark moment in Italian history in which communist terrorism killed many innocents.
Read full article: Italy: Forza Nuova representative tied up and beaten by Antifa.