Power without Scrutiny: The Jewish Privilege that Poisons Democracy

Who is Ehud Sheleg? What is CFI? Nine out of ten British voters wouldn’t have a clue. Maybe ninety-nine out of a hundred wouldn’t. Their ignorance is very unhealthy, because CFI and Mr. Sheleg have enormous power in Britain. CFI have been controlling policies on immigration and other vital topics ever since 2010, when the so-called Conservative party won a general election against the so-called Labour party.

Two wings, one vulture

Before that, it had been LFI controlling policies on immigration and other vital topics. And what are CFI and LFI? Well, you might call them the two wings of one vulture: CFI stands for Conservative Friends of Israel and LFI stands for Labour Friends of Israel. Although the vast majority of Brits are not even aware that these organizations exist, one group is very aware: the traitorous political elite.

Aspiring Prime Minister Sajid Javid at CFI

You do not get to the top in British politics without getting very close to either CFI or LFI. The Jewish Chronicle has boasted that Conservative Friends of Israel is now “the biggest lobbying group in Westminster.” Under Tony Blair, the biggest lobbying group was Labour Friends of Israel. Ambitious politicians flock to join these organizations and there’s never any need to announce who the chief speaker will be at their annual dinners. As the Guardian pointed out in 2007, the chief speaker will be either the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition. At least, that always used to be the case. But Jeremy Corbyn has threatened the tradition. As I’ve pointed out before, he isn’t in politics to become a millionaire, so Jewish money doesn’t interest him.

Iran vs Israel

But it certainly interests the Tories. And that’s where Ehud Sheleg comes in. Who is he? He’s an Israeli-born art-dealer with a British passport who is about to become Treasurer of the Conservative party, replacing Sir Mick Davies, former chairman of the Jewish Leadership Council. But Sir Mick will remain Chief Executive of the Tories. This is a very interesting situation. If people with strong Iranian or Russian connections held such important positions in the Tory party, would the British media have something to say about it?

You can bet they would. If Ehud Sheleg were an Iranian citizen called Mahmud Sharif instead, he would now be under very close scrutiny. Where do his true loyalties lie? That’s what the media would be asking. If an Iranian citizen had given hundreds of thousands of pounds to the Tories, as Ehud Sheleg already has, the media would ask whether the Tories were now pursuing Iran’s interests rather than Britain’s. Journalists would be crawling all over an Iranian treasurer’s past, probing his business interests, investigating his regular trips to Tehran and his meetings with Iranian officials, speculating about or exposing his connections with Iranian intelligence.

The dogs that don’t bark

And such scrutiny would be perfectly reasonable — indeed, the media would have a duty to investigate and speculate. If the Treasurer of the Tory party were an Iranian Muslim who still had strong ties to Iran, that Iranian Muslim might well try to influence government policy in favour of Iran. The media, as watch-dogs of the national interest, would have a duty to put him under very close scrutiny. But the Treasurer of the Tory party isn’t a Muslim called Mahmud Sharif. At present he’s a Jew called Sir Mick Davies who will soon be replaced by a Jew called Ehud Sheleg. And that makes all the difference. The British media have shown very little interest in asking questions about Jewish power in British politics.

I’m reminded of the Sherlock Holmes story “Silver Blaze” (1892), which is about a mysterious death and a missing race-horse. Fans of Arthur Conan Doyle will remember that this story contains “the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.” What was curious is that the dog did nothing. It did not bark at a criminal because it knew the criminal. Similarly, the British media are not barking at either Mick Davies or Ehud Sheleg. The media know the rules that apply to the ever-powerless Jewish community. Sycophancy directed at Jews is always acceptable, but scrutiny and criticism never are. What would happen to anyone who suggested that Mick Davies and Ehud Sheleg are fostering Israel’s interests rather than Britain’s? A lot. And none of it would be good.

For whom the Bell tolls

If you want to see what happens to those who challenge Jewish interests in modern Britain, take a look at the Guardian cartoonist Steve Bell. He’s a virtue-signalling liberal idiot, as his reaction to the Charlie Hebdo massacre clearly showed, but British Jews don’t object to his liberal idiocy. What they do object to very strongly is his criticism of Israel. After an Israeli sniper killed a young Palestinian female paramedic called Razan Al-Najjar in June 2018, Bell drew a pious cartoon in response. It portrayed the British prime minister Theresa May hosting the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu at 10 Downing Street while an image of Razan Al-Najjar burns in the fireplace behind them.

Steve Bell’s “anti-Semitic” cartoon

Bell then submitted the cartoon to Katherine Viner, the possibly Jewish editor of Guardian, who rejected it on the ground that it was anti-Semitic and equated Israel’s behaviour with that of Nazi Germany. He then took the highly unusual step of publishing the rejected cartoon and the email he sent to Viner in condemnation of her decision. It’s hard to disagree with what he said:

I cannot for the life of me begin to understand criticism of the cartoon that begins by dragging in ‘wood-burning stoves’, ‘ovens’, ‘holocaust’, or any other nazi-related nonsense. That was the last thing on my mind when I drew it, I had no intention of conflating the issues of the mass murder of European Jews and Gaza. It’s a fireplace, in front of which VIP visitors to Downing Street are always pictured (see page 12 of today’s Times), and the figure of Razan al-Najjar is burning in the grate. It’s a widely known photograph of her, becoming iconic across the Arab world and the burning is of course symbolic. She’s dead, she was shot and killed by the IDF [Israeli Defence Force] while doing her job as a medic.

I’m sorry you didn’t think it appropriate to talk to me yesterday, and I fear Katherine Butler [a deputy editor at the Guardian] bore the brunt of my outrage, for which I apologise to her, but forgive me for suspecting that the reason that you did not get in touch was because you did not really have an argument. The cartoon is sensitive, not tasteless, not disrespectful, and certainly contains no anti-Semitic tropes. It should have been published as it stands, but if you are still obdurate that it should remain unpublished, then I feel a duty to my subject to try and salvage something from this fiasco, and will resubmit it to you later this morning in a form that may get around some of the criticisms (to my mind wholly unjustified) that were made last night. (The Guardian censors cartoon in memory of Razan al Najjar: cartoonist Steve Bell responds, Public Reading Rooms, June 2018)

Photogenic but ignored: the tragic victim Razan Al-Najjar

Bell’s cartoon clearly condemns the killing of Razan Al-Najjar and criticizes Benjamin Netanyahu and his ally, the shabbos shiksa Theresa May. Equally clearly, it is not in the slightest degree anti-Semitic and makes absolutely no reference to Nazism. But Steve Bell has been censored regardless: no version of his cartoon has appeared in the Guardian. The message is clear: “Thou shalt not challenge Jewish interests or criticize Jewish behaviour.”

See No Ehud

That’s why the killing of Razan Al-Najjar has been largely ignored by the British media. It’s also why the British media have largely ignored the important news about Ehud Sheleg. Yet another Jew has risen to the top of the Conservative party, but I’ve managed to find only two substantial references to Sheleg’s forthcoming appointment as Tory treasurer. One reference was in the Jewish Chronicle, which noted that “Mr Sheleg, who is now based in north London, is said to be a donor to several community [i.e., Jewish] charitable organisations.” The other reference was by the muck-racking political blogger Guido Fawkes, who takes his nom de guerre from the conspirator who tried to blow up the House of Commons in 1605. Guido’s blog exposed something that the rest of the media have ignored:

The new Treasurer of the Conservative Party is a director of seven companies which are late filing their accounts, Guido can reveal. Ehud Sheleg, who runs a Mayfair art gallery, is set to be appointed to the role after giving the Tories half a million pounds before the last election. Sheleg is a director of The Halcyon Gallery Ltd, Washington Green Fine Arts Group, Artica Galleries, Halcyon Fine Art Group Holdings, Washington Green Retail and Halcyon Fine Art Group Ltd, all of whose accounts were due last month and have not been filed according to the Companies House website. Another company of which Sheleg was a director, Goldend Ltd, was struck off after failing to file its accounts or confirmation statement on time. The six companies which are still active now face potential fines totalling thousands of pounds. Bodes well (New Tory Treasurer is Director of 7 Companies With Overdue Accounts, Guido Fawkes, 21st May 2018)

The Guido Fawkes blog was once famous for its unruly and anarchic comments section. Five years ago the news-item above would have prompted lots of comments about Jewish power and Jewish control of the Tory party. And quite rightly so. But in 2018 one has to echo the Bible and say: “Ichabod!” (1 Kings, 4:21). The glory is departed from the Guido Fawkes blog. Like Breitbart and the London Spectator, it has purged its “anti-Semitic” commenters and imposed strict censorship on discussion of Jewish topics. You can ladle sycophancy on the Jews at those three sites, but you cannot subject Jews to any critical scrutiny, let alone suggest that they have harmed the Western world in any way.

Spiv and Take

But give Guido his due: although he hasn’t dared to name the Jew, he has dared to name the spiv. That’s a useful (if old-fashioned) British term for a crooked wheeler-dealer, particularly on the black market. Like muggers or rapists, spivs can belong to any race, but just as muggers and rapists are drawn disproportionately from the Black community, so spivs are drawn disproportionately from the Jewish community.

Under the shabbos goy Tony Blair, the Labour party’s chief fundraiser was a Jewish spiv called Michael Levy, who had made millions in the music business. Levy was at the centre of a scandal about Jewish and West-Asian businessmen buying honours from Labour. He escaped prosecution on a legal technicality, left his role as Labour treasurer, and was replaced by a Jew called Jonathan Mendelsohn. Then Labour were succeeded in government by the Tories and the part-Jewish David Cameron became prime minister. His money-man was a Jewish businessman called Andrew Feldman, who became Chairman of the Conservative party as Lord Feldman, serving first with the Muslim non-entity Sayeeda Warsi, then with the Jewish businessman Grant Shapps.

Sycophancy, not scrutiny

Are Jonathan Mendelsohn and Andrew Feldman spivs? I don’t know. But I do know that Grant Shapps is a spiv. He had to resign as Tory chairman after being accused of making large sums of money using disguise, trickery, plagiarism and testimonials from “people who seem not to exist.” Now the Jewish art-dealer Ehud Sheleg seems to be ready to put the “spiv” back into Conservative. Guido Fawkes has certainly suggested so, but he won’t dare to ask questions about Sheleg’s Jewish background and loyalty to Israel. Nor will anyone else in the mainstream media. All well-trained goyim know the rule: “Sycophancy, not scrutiny!”

One goy who certainly follows that rule is Tommy Robinson, the “Islamophobic extremist” who has been jailed for “contempt of court” while reporting on a Muslim rape-gang on trial in the Yorkshire city of Leeds. While constantly criticizing Islam, he has nothing but praise for Jews and has toured Israel as the guest of some Israeli supporters. That’s why White nationalists have criticized Robinson strongly as a Zionist agent and Judaeophile.

The World’s Most Important Question

But he gets many thumbs-up on the World’s Most Important Question: Is he “Good for the Jews”? Yes, some powerful Jews think that he is. Otherwise his arrest and imprisonment would not have won so much attention around the world. But many other Jews give him a thumbs-down on the World’s Most Important Question. The repulsive Blair-o-phile and Iraq-war fan David Aaronovitch, an influential journalist at the London Times, has decided that Robinson is not “Good for the Jews.” And that is the only criterion that matters to Aaronovitch:

Once, we’d have seen Mr Robinson coming

When Tommy Robinson makes anti-Muslim statements, we should be careful not to jump on board says David Aaronovitch. …

Do British Jews share Tommy Robinson’s view of Muslims as essentially unassimilable and alien? Because that it is what he thinks. Like [the Dutch politician] Geert Wilders … Robinson argues that Islam is itself an incorrigible religion, with religious intolerance, violence and misogyny at its scriptural heart. Its followers are therefore enjoined to be incorrigible too, and thus negative aspects of behaviour of some Muslims — female inequality, domestic violence, female genital mutilation, grooming gangs, jihadi terror, gender segregation, sectarianism and homophobia — are at the very least latent characteristics in all of them.

Robinson regards it at his crusade to open the eyes of a docile and over-tolerant majority to the demographic disaster happening all around them. That’s why he visits courts during ongoing trials to make films there, that’s why he used to tweet every single negative story that featured a Muslim in it (while leaving alone any other people’s infractions). The result is propaganda not dissimilar to what would happen if you took every bad story about Ultra-Orthodox Jews in Britain and then generalised from them. You want to talk about gender segregation? Gay rights? Weird inward-looking schools? That’s Jews for you. …

Once the unassimilable aliens were us. Once the Tommy Robinsons were warning about us. Once any self-respecting Jew with a sense of history would have seen a man like him coming. Now some don’t. Idiots. (Once, we’d have seen Mr Robinson coming, The Jewish Chronicle, 1st June 2018 / 18th Sivan 5778)

If David Aaronovitch doesn’t like Tommy Robinson, I think that’s a strong point in Robinson’s favour. Robinson has broken a strong Jewish taboo: he has criticized a sacred minority and stood up for abused White girls. And he may well lose his life for doing so. Like Gert Wilders, another Judaeophile who is risking violent death for opposing Islam, he may or not recognize the truth about the central Jewish role in Muslim immigration. If he does recognize it, he is saying nothing to expose it.

White Tide Rising

But clearly David Aaronovitch and many other Jews don’t like Robinson’s scrutiny of Muslim pathologies. They know that it is a dangerous step towards scrutiny of Jewish pathologies. Jews always want a buffer-zone of privileged minorities between themselves and the White goyim. When Whites tolerate bad behaviour by Muslims and other non-Whites, it soothes Jewish paranoia and reassures Jews about their own safety. That’s why Jews have been so insistent on minority worship. Whites must never criticize minorities or defend their own interests.

But Tommy Robinson has criticized a minority and tried, however imperfectly, to defend the interests of Whites. He might say that he includes Jews among Whites, but Jews like David Aaronovitch don’t believe him. And even if Robinson is a sincere Judaeophile, he is unleashing forces that Jews cannot control. More and more goys know which group has been the chief architects of mass immigration. I myself began to sense two years ago that the political tide had turned in favour of Whites. The big demonstrations in support of Robinson, like the rise of nationalist governments across Europe, confirm my optimism. The White tide is rising and the Jewish imperium is beginning to quake.

51 replies
  1. tadzio
    tadzio says:

    The Tommy Robinson situation presents a unique opportunity. The White Nationalist sentiments can be advanced with a single issue electoral campaign waged at a by-election, the next one called. They are frequent in the UK. If the candidacy needs a political party the EDL could be dropped in favor of focusing on the moral high ground of Free Speech. Call it the First Amendment Party. Every European country needs a First Amendment Party, especially Germany. It would also cast the campaigns in a light appealing to the American public. Vilifying the First Amendment parties would help to topple our own anti-White Racists from their perches atop an alleged ethical mountain peak.

  2. Franklin Ryckaert
    Franklin Ryckaert says:

    The British media are silent about Jewish power in Britain because they are not British but (((British))).

    Yes there is happening an awakening of White people all over the world, but at this stage still about secondary issues and not yet about their (((primary causes))).

    Islamophobia of the Judeophilic kind à la Tommy Robinson and Geert Wilders is unnecessary, incomplete and is never reciprocated by its ethnic target. It should therefore be abandoned. Both Muslims and Jews are our enemies.

    An ethnic minority that can only “feel safe” in its parasitic existence if it weakens (and ultimately destroys) its host population deserves to be expelled.

    • Elucidate
      Elucidate says:

      But to where is the question? In the past, we have always been unkind to our fellow man by kicking ‘the can’ down the road. If Mars were habitable…

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      Maybe the motive for what they do is not ‘to feel safe’ and maybe it is just a hostility to all other tribes that is in the wiring of the arab types, and is present whether or not it gives them advantage.

      Maybe this behaviour was appropriate for desert tribes, but now transposed to modern life it is like a handicap for the race that will eventually lead to its expulsion.

      If a race has a genetic trait it is hard to remove as nat sele applies to the whole tribe and not just individuals.

      We know there are other genetic traits that are significanltly between races, so why not this one also – ie an irrational hostility to all other tribes? Another genetic trait is ‘honor’ that enables Pakistanis to murder their own daughters who disobey the family. This is not possible in Western families as the feelings for the daughter are stonger than honour. Only genetic differences programmed in the genes can explain such extreme behaviour as family mirders where they all join in to save the family ‘honour’.

      In my opinion we do not need to look for reason or logic when explaining human behaviour. Our behaviour is in our wiring, not worked out by thinking of strategy.

  3. Aitch
    Aitch says:

    I’ve always loved Steve Bell’s cartoons, and I’m currently in the process of obtaining the half-dozen books of his that I don’t already have. Although he does seem to be an open-borders commie globalist, he is at least even-handed in his depiction of politicians, all of whom he portrays as the stools they are. His portraits of May, leader of Britain’s current regime, are superb.

    The fact that Breitbart News has become extremely judophilic was brought home to me forcibly on Good Friday this year, when I was banned from posting comments on the site after taking on a Jew (I suggested he was a rabbi and he didn’t demur) who’d posted a snide remark about Christ’s resurrection.

    As for entities ‘once famous for (their) unruly and anarchic’ approach to public life, the magazine ‘Private Eye’ is a case in point, having recently published cringing apologia to George Soros and the Rothschild family.

    Regarding the word ‘spiv’, I believe the word ‘shyster’ might also be used.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      I got banned just for asking why the Js in the largest community outside London vote Labour – I bet the one you had the run-in with had the feather quill for his pic. And I never broke any house rules or used bad language. ((They)) broke the rules with ad hominem and excessively foul language and were not banned of course.

      Another line of questioning they do not like is ‘where do your loyalties lie?’

      And, after they go on about historic grievances they do not like it when you say ‘you seem hostile to the West in your post. Do you feel hostile to us?’

  4. Trenchant
    Trenchant says:

    Paul Joseph Watson’s linked comment on HMP Onley inmates being 70% Muslim is quite false (30%, of whom only 3% are Pakistanis) but the sort of hysterical spin to be expected from the InfoWars camp. It’s disappointing that whites are being corraled into choosing sides in a Jewish intra-ethnic factional battle between Diaspora globalists and Israel-centric nationalists. Robinson, works as a salesman for the latter, Aaronovitch, the former. A pox on both their houses.

    Tommy will have all the protection he needs and will write, or have (((ghost)))-written, a massively successful, self-aggrandizing Mein Kampf during his stay in the Big House.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      Trenchant – it is not ‘hysterical spin’ about the % muslims in the prison – this 70% was based on what Tommy Robinson himself said, and is actually the % on the wing he was on. Alll this was clarified by Caolan Robertson and others, and I suspect you actually knew this.

      Some are so blinded by their hatred of the J that they fail to see the world as it is, and can only assess people or events through a single narrow telescope. Hitler had a Jewish friend I think – there are some who would conclude Hitler was therefore secretly working for them. They are not as powerful as you think. They cannot even get the Left who own the TV media to take their side in the Israel/Palestine conflict.

      You have to be able to stand back and see the whole picture. No way is Robinson ‘devoted’ to the Js – he wants to save his country from Islam and a few Js have helped him and he has responded as any person would who has only a certain level of understanding of politics. He sees the mslms as a common enemy of the West and the Js and he assumes that the Js are therefore on our side. You cannot condemn him for being wrong on this one as it is actually a logical conclusion.
      Anyone who can see the big picture knows that the elite in Britain want Tommy removed. They observed that when soldier Lee Rigby was beheaded in London that the people had no reaction, and so they assumed the people would say nothing if TR was removed, but they misjudged. Some say TR was getting close to things that could bring down the establishment – see the John Wedger police whistleblower on youtube

      • Trenchant
        Trenchant says:

        Interesting tactic, imputing an emotional “hatred of the J” to those who would point out the cause and not effect of the problem.

        Not Muslims, but the Jews who facilitated their arrival and who protect their welfare through the institutions are the crux of the issue.

        And no, I consulted the Vox Popoli link provided by the author. He’ll be just fine.

      • Trenchant
        Trenchant says:

        This isn’t the venue, but I believe the Lee Rigby “beheading” was a government psy-op. A hoax.

        • Dave Bowman
          Dave Bowman says:

          That would be, for me at least, very interesting to hear more about. Do you mean that in your opinion Lee Rigby was not murdered, and is still alive somewhere ? Or that he was murdered elsewhere by others ? Or perhaps that there was some form of mass illusion on that hideous event in broad daylight in the centre of London ? What sources do you have, to support this view, please ?

          • Trenchant
            Trenchant says:

            @ Dave Bowman:
            I’d suggest having a look at Nick Kollerstrom’s presentations on this theater piece. Without getting into the technical minutiae, I find it hilarious that the lady in green with her shopping trolley just meanders on down, squeezing past a maniac beheader with cleaver and a corpse just to her left in the middle of the road. That’s just the start of the unreality. As to the fate of Lee Rigby, I’ve got no idea. As in 7/7 (see “Ripple Effect”), Muslims serve as useful patsies for State Zio-terrorism gigs, yet are treated with kid-gloves by the authorities for plain-vanilla crimes (Rotherham, etc.).

  5. pterodactyl
    pterodactyl says:

    “If Ehud Sheleg were an Iranian citizen called Mahmud Sharif instead, he would now be under very close scrutiny.”

    We already have a mslm Home Secretary in Britain and there is no scrutiny on him. Unlike (lefty) Tim Farron who was hounded by the MSM over his Christian beliefs (‘As a Christian, do you condemn homosexuals?’ he was asked in every media interview). Our mslm Home Sec is never asked similar questions. So there is NO SCRUTINY for msms in politics.

    Here is our Home Sec swearing his oaths on the Kor.n. in parliament. See 20 min in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RPoitFQQ8Y

    Observe the video clip 20 min in where the usher is not allowed to touch the Kor.n. with his kaffir hands. Is this a moderate mslm like the msm tell us he is?

    (This is a Paul Weston video. See also Weston’s reply when challenged in the comments possibly about the JQ in
    / in response to Nick Rider5 comment/ “OK, suppose that was 100% true – do you think you could sell that to the country and go on to win a General Election? If not, it might be wise to keep quiet, no?”)

  6. pterodactyl
    pterodactyl says:

    “And even if Robinson is a sincere Judaeophile,”
    Before readers judge and condemn Tommy Robinson for this, remember that every person reading this was probably once a Judaeophile themselves, including Kevin MacDonald, who tells us how his eyes were not opened until he was a mature adult.
    (This is largely because (a) the OT heroes like Abraham are also the heroes of the Christians so all Christians have been raised to empathise with Js (b) why would anyone be born with an advanced political insight?)

    Only a short time ago I would have fully supported Israel, seeing a small and
    civilised country surrounded by barbarians – as is still the case – (1. a westerner
    can stay in a hotel there without being kidnapped, which is not possible to do safely in surrounding mslm countries 2. Prisons are not full of Jewish criminals, so genetically they are not this type of criminal like other races are) The thing that changed my mind was interacting with Js on Breitbart and finding them to be hostile to non-Js and obsessed with historic injustices against them that they seem to want revenge for. So, hostile to the host country, eg Britain, and at the same time indignant when you question their loyalty to Britain. Then a single comment in Bb said ‘Kevin MacDonald gets it’ and I looked him up in Wikepedia then watched some Youtube interviews. If I had not been through this process I would have no idea that Js were disproportionately hostile to the West. If an ordinary person like myself can spend decades not knowing this by reading only the MSM, why should not TR also?

    Zionism is not TR’s specialist subject or a main interest. He has been approached by friendly Jews (eg Rebel Media) who have helped him, so why should he not respond favourably to them? Especially as in contrast to this friendship he gets a barrage of hostility from the ‘far-right’. (In a way it helps the patriotic cause that the more extreme end do not like TR as this increases his appeal to the undecided)

    Furthermore, TR sees muslims as the no 1 threat and he sees that they hate the Js so this makes him assume the Js would be an ally of his against the mslm takeover of his country. I suggest he believes this to be the case and does not appreciate how instrumental the Js are in bringing over the mslms.

    IMO TR observes the msms are hostile, then he observes that the alt-R are often sympathetic to msms (Palestine), so it is logical and rational of him to be suspicious of the Alt-R for this. He has no idea that the Alt-R have these sympathies not because deep down they really do like the msms or care about Palestinian land claims, or care about the msulim medic in the article, but the Alt-R have these sympathies only because they are friendly with anyone who opposes the Js, and often this friendship goes too far, as when they Alt-R end up supporting Palestine.

    I suggest the best tactic is to not attack those like TR who are helping to stir up
    patriotism One of the most eloquent short talks explaining this is by ‘Wolf Age’ on Red Ice TV wolf age

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      Robinson as the gormless but gut-feel patriot sits ill with his professed anti-racism. Blacks are just dandy, ditto non-Islamic “Asians”? That just doesn’t pass the smell test.

      On malign Jewish influence, sure, it’s not self-evident, and Robinson’s antics and affinity with that camp do nothing to bring it into focus. Until the question “Who facilitated the mass arrival of Muslims in the first place” is relentlessly pursued, no meaningful change can occur.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        TR often talks about his bl friends and mslm friends and I believe this is genuine. He invited them to his wedding. But all I observe is that the supporters on the march 9 June were 99.9% white and none of his bl friends or mslm friends showed up. In other words he leads a w movement but does not realise it. Neither do the Js who support him realise he is awakening a patriotism (as Wolf Age describes – see link above) and in the end this patriotism will cause the pendulum to start swinging back, and this patriotism means ppl start voting for parties that are not going to tolerate any group that undermines our best interests. This includes any race that is wired to be hostile – and to feel hostile irrespective of whether or not this is in their best interests (many here assume best interest/power/money are motives but in my opinion the motive simply comes from animal behaviour wiring – the best example is w ppl adopting Africans – no power/money/best interest at all).

        Some races are just wired to behave in a way that in the end will provoke a reaction, but not whilst we remain rich, safe and pampered.

        So Trenchant refers to ‘meaningfull change’ and this is it – the pendulum swinging to a different place, a place where in the end we can do something about all our enemy within. See Paul Weston’s comment above – the aim is to win a GE, not to ‘be right about everything’.

        The person who refuses to pay an unjust parking ticket loses his house in the end when the fine escalates – this has happened. In other words, sticking to your principles too strongly can make you lose.

        • Trenchant
          Trenchant says:

          Robinson’s sole focus on the amorphous “Radical Islam” rather than Pakistanis is functional for some future bait-and-switch by his enablers and the authorities. Gin the public up with Islamic molesters and offer them an Iran intervention instead. It’s crude but worked well enough with Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein.

          • pterodactyl
            pterodactyl says:

            It is relevant here that he left Rebel media. I know they still help him, but they do not control him.

  7. Curmudgeon
    Curmudgeon says:

    “This is a very interesting situation. If people with strong Iranian or Russian connections held such important positions in the Tory party, would the British media have something to say about it?”

    It’s worse than that. Some years ago, I had collected a number of platitudes my MP’s party had made about Israel, including the standards “friends” and “stand by”. I then asked if his party would apply those same platitudes to Brazil or Ireland, with whom my country has good relations, and have never been sanctioned by the UN, with our government’s backing. The blank stare was enough to tell me that he had no idea of the brain washing he had been through.

    As for Tommy Robinson, I don’t really care whether he is an Auntie Shemite or “Jew Friendly”. The issue of is how he has been made an example of, stitched up, railroaded, or any other term that fits the situation. The premise of public disturbance is laughable, as are endangering the process of the trial. As Robinson had been extensively coached by his lawyer on staying within the law of his suspended sentence, the “breach of peace” charge is bogus, as there were others doing the same as Robinson.
    The jury had made its decision. The Court was being recalled to pronounce the verdict(s). The only possible “risk” was the judge’s sentencing. The conclusion must be that Robinson was influencing the Judge.

    Robinson’s arrest, trial, with subsequent suppression of all related evidence and information, endangers everyone.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        I do not believe TR thought he would be arrested as in my opinion he genuinely thought he would die if sent to prison. And this is still a real threat – it only takes one prison officer to decide he wants to be the hero of the left/mslms and open the door containing the ROP members.

        As for prejudicing the outcome of future cases – the list of names TR read out was already on the BBC website!

        If you adopt the principle that TR was prejudicing future trials, then no trial result could ever be printed ever that involved anyone with the name ‘m..h…d’.

        In fact no trial result ever could be written about again if those found guilty might one day be involved in crime again.

        • Trenchant
          Trenchant says:

          That’s not true. TR was potentially influencing the future trial of people involved in the current proceedings, not at all Muslims.

          • Curmudgeon
            Curmudgeon says:

            What possible influence could Robinson have that the BBC doesn’t? He was reading content from their website. Why wasn’t the BBC, or any other (((media))) arrested for doing the same thing?
            There is always media reporting on trials where other accused are waiting for trial, even where there is a ban on publication. The ban is on the evidence presented during the trial, not the charges. In Robinson’s case, all of the charged had been identified, and the charges made public. If the question was prejudice to the trial, then why are any accused named publicly by police. I had a family member charged with attempted murder. His neighbours shunned his family and they received threats. The media had a heyday. At trial, his defense presented no evidence, because there was no tangible evidence against him. The jury found him not guilty in less than half an hour. Apparently, the jury wasn’t influenced by the media. By the way, there was no media reporting on the verdict and/or how quickly it was reached.
            I’ve been interviewed, outdoors, by TV news, there are always a few people stopping to watch, as there are with people live streaming. Neither I nor the TV news reporter were approached by nearby police.
            The police have known about these rape gangs for a more than dozen years, and so has the public where these gangs have been operating. Nick Griffin was arrested in 2004 for “inciting hatred” while talking about them in a constituency meeting, and cleared in 2006.
            Robinson is being shut up by the political class, period.

          • pterodactyl
            pterodactyl says:

            In response to Curmudgen and the trial for his brother – jury trials still guarantee protection from miscarriages of justice by the state that would undoubtedly occur otherwise – hence they could not let Robinson face a jury. But the danger we now face is, what if the jury were all muslim? It is never wise to rely on this group for justice and put yourselves at their mercy.

            While we are on the subject of corruption in the legal system, there is a hugely significant interview on Youtube that is worth watching, by police whistleblower John Wedger. He details the way the strings are pulled from high up, which is interesting for those who like to work out how everything is controlled in practical terms. Eg funding for certain departments is made very low, people are moved on – but it also shows that even the most powerful do not always get their own way. ‘They’ whoever that may be are not 100% in control of the narrative.

            There is also another case that could bring down the establishment and which is bigger than Saville – the case of Melanie Shaw. She is another whistleblower currently in prison on charges of ‘assaulting prison staff’ if you believe that. But her story has not got the same publicity as TR’s

  8. Franklin Ryckaert
    Franklin Ryckaert says:

    Whatever Tommy Robinson’s dubious connections, his arrest is useful for our cause because the broad public now understands that not only Muslims are our enemy but our ruling class is our enemy too. For a country like Britain, where the people kept on voting for the big parties, which promote mass non-white immigration, that is a major development. Unfortunately there is no professional nationalist party in Britain now to profit from the change in public awareness. Such a party is urgently needed. Nationalist parties can win elections and change politics as the cases of Austria and Italy clearly illustrate.

    • Johnny Rottenborough
      Johnny Rottenborough says:

      Franklin Ryckaert—The fact that nationalist parties are having more success on the Continent than in Britain may hinge, at least in part, on different systems of voting. The British system of first-past-the-post makes it more difficult for non-Establishment parties to get into Parliament. At the 2015 British general election, proportional representation would have given UKIP more than 80 seats in Parliament. FPTP gave them one, and that success was largely due to the popularity of the candidate, Douglas Carswell, with his constituents.

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      Robinson does everything possible to avoid illuminating who makes up this hostile ruling class. That is his brief.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        They befriend and help so they can control the narrative. That is the purpose of Breitbart – to get all the right-wing people to get the news from their controlled and monitored site where the Js are never criticised. This does not mean that those who ‘fall for it’ are genuinely devoted to their cause. Most genuinely are fooled in my opinion, eg if you read BB you would never suspect the Js are behind mass immigration

          • pterodactyl
            pterodactyl says:

            Breitbart knows exactly what they are doing and know the full picture, but TR does not. Another person like TR is popular blogger Pat Condell. These ppl are innocents. You will never win them over by attacking them. They are actually on your side. Why not leave the involvement of the Js until a later stage – we must get our countries back first from the enemy within who are making us 3rd world, then later decide who the traitors are (esp in MSM) . It is not just the Js who are bringing us down – it is our own enemy within indigenous left. (Get rid of all Js & our problems would not go away, althoughthe journey to becoming 3rd world would be slower). Just look at all the anti-Trump or anti-Tommy Robinson hate comments on Twitter from the left – these are not Js.

            Wolf Age (ref above) is the best speaker on this

            As Paul Weston says, the important thing at this is to win elections.

          • Trenchant
            Trenchant says:

            Paul Weston has a hide talking about winning.

            These activists aren’t English patriots, they’re Zionists in anti-Islam drag.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      Franklin R makes a good point about awakening the ppl to the nature of the ruling class. If you go on social media you will see Teresa May is thoroughly despised amongst conservative ppl. However, the older generation who do not use social media still buy the MSM newspapers like the DM and watch the TV news, who do everything they can to fool the conservative voters into continuing to vote for traitors like May.

      Not many conservative-minded people are actually awakened at present, eg there was a bi-election recently in Lewisham and of the 3500 conservative ppl about 3000 voted for May’s Cons ie more immigration, and only a few hundred voted for the anti-immigration parties UKIP & For Britain. So only 1 in 7 of those who want to reduce immign actually voted to reduce it and the other 6 out of 7 were still fooled by the MSM into voting for a Party (Con) with the opposite views to their own.

  9. m___
    m___ says:

    The missing actor.

    Why not having pulled in Assange into the picture. For obvious reasons. Was it too hard? It takes away much of the potential of your article. The evident analytical focus should have been WASP-Jew-Assange-Robbinson.

  10. kikz
    kikz says:

    pattern recognition of controlling influences on ‘immigration’ in ‘welcoming the stranger into OTHER PEOPLE’S COUNTRIES’….it’s anti-semitic. ;D

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      Italy should send the boats of unwanted African migrants on to Israel – and justify it by quoting from the statements from leading Js about welcoming refugees

      • Franklin Ryckaert
        Franklin Ryckaert says:

        Italy could also point to the very nature of the state of Israel as “a nation of immigrants”. So why should Israel not accept those “dreamers” from Africa ?

  11. David White
    David White says:

    Tommy Robinson? The self – confessed Zionist? The happy, bent- kneed pilgrim to Israel? The grinning IDF tank sit-atopper? You’re having a larrrrrf, aren’t you? He’s one of them.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      David – he is in the place that you yourself were a few years ago, unless you were born with political knowledge. He is not ‘committed’ in the sense you think, he is just reacting as a decent person would to what he sees and hears. He does not know everything that goes on.

  12. pterodactyl
    pterodactyl says:

    There is one way I disagree with most people on this forum – that it is a mistake for the Alt-R to side with the Palestinians. You are empathising with a race that wants to conquer you. It is also the case that the Palestinians want to drive the Js into the sea, but why does this desire of theirs against the Js make their land claims just and make the medic mentioned in the article above a heroine?

    You are befriending and empathising with those who want to conquer you via Islm, and in so doing you are alienating all those right-wing people who are strongly repelled by Islm (such as Pat Condell – a popular youtuber). Your dislike of Js for their hostility to the West has put you in a position where you are befriending another group, the Palestinians, for one reason only, and that is because they share a common enemy with you – and people outside your group can see this and do not like it.

    The Js control anti-semitism (using the H industry) but they do not control the MSM – the left do, and usually the Js support the left’s msm narrative, except when it comes to Israel/Palestine, and here the left parts company with the Js, and the left wins, and, incomprehensible to most of us, this support of the left for the J’s enemies does nothing to stop the Js supporting the left!

    There are NO TV documentaries that suppport Israel’s land claims. You will NEVER see a map on TV showing the size of Israel and the size of surrounding arab countries, as this would illustrate how unjust it is for the arabs to want even more when they already own 95% of the land and resources of the region. To say Israel has no valid land claims means you have gone (or been driven) to a place where there is no place for reason or fairness. I can see what has driven you there, and I realise that most people have no idea of these things, but I think it is a bad move, a bad tactic to go there.

    So the Left hates Israel for being civlised and better (this motive is what shapes the left’s views on all issues), and instead of the Js therefore being right wing and supporting the West (the logical approach and THE SELF-INTEREST ONE) the Js choose instead to not support us and instead to try and make us 3rd world, and they support our enemies – their enemies! But most people have no idea about this, so do not take kindly when the Alt-R criticises the Js.

    *the mslms hate Israel
    *the left hate Israel, but co-operate with Js who hate the West
    *the ordinary right-wing ppl of the West like Israel, as it is the civilised surrounded by barbarians
    *Israel does not like the West (even though we help them) and seeks to bring down the West, including by making us islamic or communist or 3rd world or by War
    *the alt-R hates Israel and this makes some of them support the msms (a bad move!)
    *the msms hate the West

    This is more complex than any love triangle and takes some puzzling out to work out the tangle – so do you blame TR or others who cannot work it all out? I am not claiming to know all the answers, except that it seems to me that we should NOT look for self-interest as motives (or greed or power) and instead we should look at animal nehaviour explanations, the same ones that make pampered cats fight their neigbour when there is NOTHING in it for them, only disadvantages, yet they are condemned by their genes/wiring to follow this course that is against their own interests.

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      Your apologetics for Israel are quite transparent. No one buys the idea that Palestinians are out to conquer the West. Joining Jews’ fate with that of Western peoples is a neocon ruse.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        I never said we should help Israel. I said their land claims are just and they are surrounded by barbarians whilst they themselves are civilised. That does not mean we should help them. But if we did, a precondition would be that they cease hostilities to us, ie stop using their wealth and political influence and media influence to bring down the West. Then the West might begin to help them, although in my opinion the Js would never be able to put aside their hostility to the West as it is in the genes.

        For the Palestinian muslims as for any muslims in the M.E. the Crusades happened recently and the second priority of their lives is to reverse them, with only one priority higher than this, which is to conquer the Jews first. Then they can feel the glory of their religion being superior to the other two rivals. This glory is connected to their ‘honor’ thinking which we in the West cannot appreciate as we do not have the genes for it. Proof that we are different genetically on this point about ‘honour’ is that Westerners would never engage in honour killings where the whole family joins in the murder of the daughter. You need special genes to be able to do this. And the Js also have special genes that mean that no matter how much the W helps and befriends them, they remain hostile. This hostility in response to friendship also requires special genes, which individualistic races do not posses. And because they do not possess these genes for tribal hostility, Westerners cannot notice this unprovoked hostility going on, and so allow the Js to get on with it.

        If you have a theory of how everything works in politics (ie the Js are in control), you cannot just discount some of the facts that you do not like.

        You cannot pretend the Js control the MSM, when the MSM is hostile to all J’s land claims.

        You cannot pretend the Js have no valid land claims just because you do not like the Js. Just look at the map and see what they have and what the muslims have! There is no way the Js have too much land!

        You cannot pretend the Palestinians are civilised in comparison with the Js, when if you stay in a hotel in Israel you will be safe but in any surrounding muslim country you would be kidnapped within 24 hours.

        You cannot pretend that Js are uncivilised when in any country their prison population is v low.

        And you cannot say that anyone who wants to incorporate all these facts into a theory of how things work ‘must be on their side’ Surely the purpose of this blog is to discuss the evidence to get to the truth, and not to just say ‘the Js control everything’ – the danger of this thinking is that it makes one unable to fully appreciate the contribution to our national suicide made by our own people – our own indigenous enemy within who are wired to be true lefties.

        And another drawback of this thinking (that makes you say the Palestinians are worthy people who deserve our support) is that you alienate almost all of the right-wing people from your cause!

        Your tactics ensure that the right wing people will observe you are wrong about land in Israel, so they will conclude you are wrong about everything else you say about them including when you say anything about the H industry or bankers or Hollywood. In the eyes of the right wing people your support for Palestinian muslims immediately puts you in the category of ‘not one of us – this group should be shunned – what they say is wrong – so no I will not read Kevin MacDonald”s books or listen to anything you say about the H or bankers as you are a group that supports muslims’.

Comments are closed.